The annual Oscar race, which extends over about 10 months, from the Cannes Film Festival in May through the Academy Awards ceremony in March, is like a political competition. It starts with the candidates throwing their hats into the ring (in film festivals and the first). Then, the donors of candidates who have a potential (based on reactions and criticism) begin to muddle their land (emphasizing the stories that present them in the best possible light) and court the voters (during Projections and receptions, as well as questions and answers and interviews). Some advance to primaries and caucus (the many other price salons preceding the Oscars). And then comes on election day (Oscar evening herself).
But the similarities do not stop there. If it is certainly true that the implications to win a political election are more important and large -scale than the implications of the victory of an Oscar, the potential awards of the victory of an Oscar – reputation, monetary and otherwise – are Significant enough so that they can also have people behave unpleasantly and / or allow others to seek and expose the bad behavior.
Case in point: Karla Sofía GascónThe Spanish actress who played the main character in Emilia PérezAnd which was rewarded by an nomination for the Oscars of the best actress on January 23, which made her the first trans trans to be named a acting finalist by the Academy.
Less than a week later, the prospects of the Oscars of Gascón and the whole life, completely implosed. In an interview on January 28, she made comments which implied, without evidence, that the people associated with a colleague nominated from the Oscars of the best actress Fernanda Torres (I’m still there) were behind the attacks against her, which caused a rapid reaction of many, including the army of the Brazilians who passionately defended Torres and her online film all season.
Shortly after, by coincidence or not, tweets published in recent years by Gascón, containing sectarian comments on a wide range of marginalized communities and even the Oscars itself, have been determined and disseminated on X (formerly Twitter ). The whole has since become viral and has become Gascón, who quickly disabled his X account, in Hollywood version of Gary Condit,, John Edwards Or George Santos – In other words, completely toxic. At this point, Mel Gibson is probably more popular in town.
We can speculate that the exhibition of Gascón’s tweets, and the moment of this one, was not entirely biological. And we can also say that Emilia Pérez The Netflix distributor, with its deep pockets and dozens of people working specifically on the prize -cereal efforts, should have caught them before investing millions in an Oscar campaign for a film with it in its center; After all, a similar situation, although involving a single tweet, has almost derailed the prospects of the Oscars of another division film, Green paperSix years ago.
But the essential, of course, is that Gascón did for herself.
I find that the whole situation is shocking and sad.
I interacted a lot with Gascón in recent months in various festivals, events, interviews and questions and answers, and I have not seen any indication on this dark side. She had an undoubtedly special link with her Costars, Zoe Saldaña And Selena Gomezand its director, Jacques Audiard. Often, she was accompanied by her young girl, who struck me like a really impressive and formidable child, and who must feel a lot of pain at the moment.
Beyond that, there is this: we must not like Emilia Pérez To recognize that Gascón gave a courageous and daring performance in the film, and that the success of his prize -ceremony season has represented the hope and progress of many other people. In different circumstances, she would have continued to be celebrated in the Oscars, to win or lose, and would finally finish on a wall at the Academy Museum of Motion Pictures, describes as a pioneer alongside tastes of tastes Sidney Poitier And Kathryn Bigelow.
But now, following her behavior, her chances of winning the best actress Oscar, who have been mixed to start, have turned off, and the same thing may be said for her future in the business. And she also seriously damaged the prospects of the Oscars of her film – which was undoubtedly the favorite for the best film Oscar, having received 13 nominations in the head, just a shy of the record of all time – and, the most unjust of all, the prospects of his colleagues who were also nominated for the film, including Saldaña, who has been the best support actress for months. Based on my conversations in recent days with the members of the Academy, many will have trouble voting to Emilia Pérez In any Category, since Emilia Pérez herself has become toxic.
Emilia Pérez is far from the first favorite of the Oscars to find themselves taken in the “scandal” at a particularly inappropriate moment of the awards season. Especially during the last quarter of a century, since the naked jig Shakespeare in love against. Save the private Ryan Brawl, the accusations of various degrees of legitimacy and, in some cases, have threatened the prospects for A beautiful spirit (The man played by Russell Crowe would have been an anti -Semitic); Slumdog millionaire (accused of having exploited his children Indian actors); The injured locker (A veteran said he had torn off his story); King’s speech (to have allegedly falsified history); And Green paper (for so many different things).
Interestingly, each of these films has still won the best Oscar. The members of the Academy judged the complaints false, deceptive or unimportant to their assessment of evaluation of the quality of a film. But the situation of Gascón feels different from everything that preceded him, because his bad behavior is undeniable (although she said that some of the tweets that have been disseminated), indefensible (there is there An ethnic group that she did not have offended?) And completely contrary to what she and her film are supposed to be (namely, tolerance). In addition, she has undermined the efforts of many people who worked tirelessly in her name.
It is a very modern Oscars scandal, which would not have been possible a few years ago before the advent of the Internet and the rise in social media. As in politics, there is always were forms of opposition research mobilized in the Oscar breed, but generally by strategists working in the name of another campaign; I don’t tolerate this, but that’s the truth. In this case, however, all indications are that civilians – which may or may not be among a large number of people who oppose vocally Emilia PérezThe representation of trans and Mexico people is offensively simplistic, on the other – has taken matters into their own hands, research, location and dissemination of harmful information on someone who has left them a lot for find.
Could these civilians could have been helped and encouraged by a rival campaign that would benefit from the fall of Gascón and Emilia Pérez? Anything is possible and, in the Internet and Social Media era, very difficult to prove. But the main thing is always the same: they have completely upset the Oscar race.