CHAOS, CONFUSION AND SCANDALS AT THE 2017 OSCARS!
February 28, 2017
First let me talk about the event itself before going to the last minutes of the show.
So I started watching around 4 pm. ABC had 3 presenters; One black man (Michael Strahan) one black woman (Robin Roberts) and one white woman. Hum...Three people, 2 blacks that's 66%. Hum...
So the show started with Jimmy Kimmel hosting.
“The broadcast is being watched in more than 225 countries that now hate us,” Kimmel quipped.
That's rather strange since they are only 193 countries in the world. And I doubt that it is watched in North Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia or Laos! Japan? Yes. South Korea? Yes. China? Probably, but not in Yemen, Koweit and some other countries in the region. But Egypt, Israel, Lebanon, Jordan; yes.
So that's already a mistake by Kimmel; 225 countries!
Six minutes into the show Jimmy Kimmel made his first anti-Trump comments (Six minutes into the show!)
-“It’s so easy to reach out and heal. I want to say thank you to President Trump. I mean, remember last year when it seemed like the Oscars were racist? That’s gone thanks to him.” Nice, Jimmy!
(Come to think of it, his "225 countries that now hate us" is his first anti-Trump comment.)
Three minutes later, 9 minutes into the show, Kimmel made another anti-Trump comment:
"Some of you get to come on this stage and make a speech that the President of the United States will tweet about in all caps during his 5 a.m. bowel movement."
Really vulgar and disrespectful!
You don't have bowel movement Jimmy? And what is it with the Left and some Republicans that complained he tweets at 3 am (not 5 a.m. as Kimmel said). What is it to you when he tweets? Are you going to say to the President when he can and cannot tweet?
At least he refers to Trump as The President of the United States.
The Trump jokes from Kimmel continued throughout the show as he took the mic in between award announcements.
“Now it’s time for something that is very rare today, a president that believes in both arts and sciences,” Kimmel said before introducing Academy President Cheryl Boone Isaacs.
He also tweeted at the president at one point, writing #MerylSaysHi.
Also some joke about "You saw what happened last week in Sweden?"
Some costume winner said "this is for all immigrants". He was Italian so what's with that? Did Trump ban Italians?
Some presenter said he is against the wall between the US and Mexico (he was Mexican) and who cares what he thinks?
When they announced the nomination for best foreign movies and one of them is from Iran, I knew Iran will win. And it did. And the director didn't come, not because he was banned as some newspapers claimed but by his own choice. According to his own statement "Out of respect to my countrymen and the people in the 6 other countries". He could have come. The ban is about terrorists. We know he is not a terrorist (I think) so he would probably have received an exemption if he applied for a visa. But he didn't ask, he decided to stay for the reason explained above.
Then he spoke about the "inhumane ban" (sic). Is it inhumane to try to stop terrorists?
I will tell you what is inhumane! Inhumane is to send a group of Iran Revolutionary Guard to Argentina to blow up a Jewish center and kill 85 innocent people. Argentina pointed the finger at Iran.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMIA_bombing
Also Iran is the number one terrorist country in the world. The US, the UN, the European Union all agrees on this, so it is pure Chutzpah for an Iranian to lecture us about inhumanity.
That's right: an Iranian is lecturing the US about Democracy and Human rights. Iran where homosexuals are hanged just because they are homosexual. (just like the nazis did). Iran who shot into the crowd of people protesting the corrupt, crooked elections that put Ahmadinejad in power for another term. Iran shooting and killing their own people! Iran who ban opposition parties.
He is lecturing us! Unbelievable! But what is more unbelievable is that at the end of the speech the crowd at the Oscar applauded in approval!
Who are these people? Why are they such F..*@#.g idiots?
It would have been funny if a terrorist managed to enter the Chinese theatre and blow himself up and killing dozens (hundreds?) of these celebrities. Like RobertDe Niro, Meryl Streep, Whoopi Goldberg and all the other idiots. They would say before they die "Oh my God! I was wrong! Don't let...don't let... the Muslims in our ...ooh! aaah..." (Dead!) I would love that. Maybe next year?
Salma Hayek spoke about short movies and said that they present different emotions; laughter, love, challenging authority and when she said that she paused and she had a little expression as if to say "hint-hint oppose Trump" but then again she is Hispanics so...
The racist, anti-Semite, drunk, moron that is Mel Gibson was there which is an outrage. He talked at the red carpet with black host Michael Strahan of ABC who was very friendly toward him (huh?) then tap him on the back and offer his hand. Mel Gibson looked at the hand, hesitated then shook it (I'm sure he then rushed to the bathroom to wash the hand that touched the hand of a black person).
In the audience we saw shots of Mel Gibson and his fake grins, a despicable person. His father is a racist Nazi, Holocaust denier, vicious hateful man. Mel is no different. Like father, like son. At the red carpet he said about his movie of an objector of conscience saying that refusing to kill, to commit violence is the greatest thing. What? This is the same Gibson who love violence! Braveheart is violence. His movie about pre-Columbian (what's the name?) shows not only people dying but shows details how an arrow goes deep into the skull, slow motion, music: he's the kind of guy who gets an erection when he see violence like that. For him to make a movie about an objector of conscience is hypocrisy.
Some people might say he changed. Bullshit! People do not change. He is the same ass he was 10 years ago and 15 years ago.
He didn't win (nobody expected him to win ) but unfortunately his movie won two awards; best editing and best something- who cares?
But at least he didn't come on stage and we didn't have to look at his ugly racist face.
Now they have to sanitized the entire theatre because of this parasite polluting the air with his filthy presence. Go back to Australia, you asshole!!
Meryl Streep didn't win either so we were spared of any anti-Trump speeches. Kimmel joked before about Meryl Sweep being over-rated etc and I guess Trump did say so and thus Kimmel went for that. But in reality Meryl Streep is indeed over-rated. there is nothing that Meryl Streep does that cannot be done by someone else like Susan Sarandon or Glen Close. She is not irreplaceable. She is ugly and she is just an actress; if she doesn't play a certain role the producers will look for someone else. Nobody will say "If Meryl won't do this the entire production is off!"
One of the presenter was the anti-white racist Samuel L. Jackson but he didn't say anything political, just announced the winners.
Ruth Negga: I didn't want her to win because I've heard her the previous day speaking on NPR and complaining that they are not enough black people in the movies. What? If anything, Blacks are overrepresented! Black people in the US represent only 12% of the population and therefore if they are more than 12% of Blacks in movies, television, etc they are overrepresented.
Thank God she didn't win.
So we are now more than 3 hours into the show. And I'm thinking:
It wasn't as bad as I thought it will be. I expected a barrage of hateful speeches against Trump with calls for "resistance" and such (and remember this is an Academy award show about movies; this was not the Democratic Convention!) I'm not saying it was good: yes there were anti-Trump comments but they were mostly from Kimmel. Now traditionally the host try to keep it nice and it is the winners who use their opportunity to make political statements.
The host usually do not unless they are Black: Whoopi Goldberg made political statements when she was hosting. And another time (she hosted more than once because Hollywood is in love with black people) she said "They asked me not to do political comments but I will do it anyway but only now for a few minutes to get it out of my chest and then we do the show without comments" and then she spoke for 5 minutes or so and it was over. Chris Rock another black host, of course was all about politics, non-stop. I wrote about this last year/
link to Our society:
https://oursocietymagazine.blogspot.com/search/label/Blacks%2F%20racism
But this time it was Kimmel, not so much the winners, who made the comments. Some stupid, unfair and vulgar, some not so bad but still it is a movie event not a convention. I guess some winners said to themselves "Why should I trash Trump since Jimmy Kimmel is doing such a good job at that?"
So 5-7 minutes before the end of the show I knew this (the above) is what I will write. Now the last award is for best picture and hopefully, probably, it will go to "La La Land".
And then the unexpected happened.
The 89th Academy Awards will likely be remembered not for the night's big winners, but for a huge mistake, after presenter Faye Dunaway, the talentless actress, awarded "La La Land" the best picture Oscar that should have gone to "Moonlight."
Even Warren Beatty saw there is a problem: Look at the footage: Warren looked at the card, couldn't understand what's going on, (the reason why Warren was confused is because the card said "Emma Stone-Best actress for La La Land" which is an award that was already given) looked at Fay Dunaway and she said "You're impossible", she looked at the card and then SHE said "LA LA LAND".
If she had any brain she would have noticed that the card said "Best actress Emma Stone for La La land" an award that was already given, she would have saw that it didn't say "Best movie". She should have turned to the people in the aisle and asked what's going on instead of jumping to conclusion. But if you know anything about Fay Dumb Away and her acting techniques according to the Actor's Studio, you won't be surprised.
While the "La La Land" cast was onstage hugging one another and giving their speeches, producer Jordan Horowitz stopped short and announced suddenly that "Moonlight" had won.
---------------------------------------------------------
THIS IS WHY I THINK MOONLIGHT WON
The Oscars accused of racism wanted to give a prize to a black movie. So they choose politics over Art: La La Land was clearly the best picture, it is also a happy picture; it's about love, its romantic. It has all the ingredients to win but ignoring a black movie (and there were two or three this year) wasn't a good idea.
"La La Land" was the favorite. It is a happy film, with music, dancing: it is a musical! The director said he was inspired by "Singing in the Rain and "Les Parapluies de Cherbourg" and "Les Demoiselles de Rochefort". In addition is it about Hollywood. Everybody likes it. It won best director, best actress, best production design, best original score, best original song and best cinematography.
But then I guess that some of the voters said to themselves "This is a happy movie with music and dancing but should we be happy in those dark days when Adolf Hitler is in the White House?
No, this is no time to be happy, to sing and dance (when we should protest and resist ). So we are going to vote for another movie especially a black movie just to show we are not racist as some black people say".
It is the politically correct thing to do.
It is the Affirmative Action Oscar.
MOONLIGHT IS THE AFFIRMATIVE ACTION MOVIE
For those of you who don't know: Affirmative Action is a program that gives jobs or admissions to people not because they deserve it but because the color of their skin; if they are black or brown they win. It is basically reverse discrimination (against White, Asian, Jews and everybody who is not black). The Supreme Court in the end said it was illegal and anti-constitutional.
"Moonlight" won because it is a black movie, period.
Moonlight, a black movie, is chosen over the all-white "La La Land" for political reason when politics is more important than art.
I do not see "Moonlight" as the legitimate Oscar winner for Best picture 2016
It is "La La Land"!
It is clear that Hollywood accused of racism gave the prize to a black movie instead of the right winner to calm the Black and leftists critics (like Black Lives Matter and Hollywood so white).
Ask a recount.
Maybe we should start a #stolenoscar ?
So they voted for this black movie "Moonlight"
But the real winner is "La La Land". Make no mistake about it. They put politics and politically correctness first, over the real should-be winner.
Moonlight won by fraud just like Hillary Clinton won some states because illegal immigrants were able to vote and because dead people voted as well. Likewise, Moonlight won illegally. It is a illegitimate winner.
When "La La Land" was announced as the winner the crowd cheered; everybody was happy, everybody wanted it to win, everybody knew it will win, then when it was learned that it did not win, people were stunt, silent disbeliefs the black people won!
The audience in the theater were not happy and refused to talk to the reporters.
The whole thing is a mess. Hollywood who are still in shock that Trump is president are now even more confused.
Just like November 8 when some people couldn't believe that Trump won.
So "La La Land" didn't win? asked someone -No. the black movie won!
So like John Lewis, I say "I do not see "Moonlight" as the legitimate Oscar winner for Best picture 2016: It is La La Land!"
I advise the producer of "La La Land" to advertise this movie as "The REAL winner of best picture 2016"
