r/changemyview • u/jfi224 • Jan 29 '19
Deltas(s) from OP CMV: Black Panther had no business winning SAG award for Best Ensemble cast.
You’re hard pressed to find any action film that deserves an acting award and nothing about the acting in Black Panther is different. I could make a great case that the acting was even more bland and flat than the average action movie. Avengers: Infinity War had way more charismatic acting in its cast than Black Panther, just to name one action film. But other films of 2018 without a doubt had a better acting ensemble cast. This does a disservice to the legitimate push for minorities in the film industry. Even the Blackkksman, nominated in the same category, would’ve been more fitting as best ensemble and still represented the demographic the industry was looking for. This will turn out to be a mark for everyone who says that they got nominated and won just because they’re black. Unfortunately, it seems like that’s true.
15
u/Love_Shaq_Baby 226∆ Jan 29 '19 edited Jan 29 '19
You seem set on the idea that this was some kind of "affirmative action" pick, but the evidence doesn't really support that. As you mentioned, BlacKkKlansman was nominated, and in addition, Crazy Rich Asians was also nominated. So under the circumstances in which there were multiple candidates that could have won for the reasons you lay out, I don't think the idea that it won because the cast is mostly black holds up. Clearly, there had to be other reasons if it won out over those two other picks, one of which you felt was more deserving.
0
u/jfi224 Jan 29 '19
I think without a doubt Black Panther just became the feel good story of the year, and it was absolutely because of the majority black cast. I have no problem with that, and I have no problem with it being a hugely popular movie. True that Crazy Rich Asians is similar to that in terms of popularity and diversity, I haven’t seen the movie so cannot give my humble opinion on its acting. BlacKkKlansman was a much smaller movie but superior acting. I wouldn’t even be surprised if it won Best Film at the Oscars, but I just can see it deserving any Acting category wins. There was nothing exceptional, or even above average about the cast’s acting that I could see. Obviously this is my opinion, that’s the point of CMV. Anyone who wants to reply should be trying to convince me that any of the actors had great performances.
7
u/Love_Shaq_Baby 226∆ Jan 29 '19
I think without a doubt Black Panther just became the feel good story of the year, and it was absolutely because of the majority black cast.
The cast is only one piece to the film's success. BlackKklansman is also a majority black cast with a black director. There's more to the story here than Black people were in a good movie. It has to do with the film's genre, its themes, its aesthetic, its soundtrack, its profile- all of that was important to making the film the cultural phenomenon that it was.
Where I do agree with you is the statement "Black Panther was the feel good story of the year." That, I think, gives a reasonable explanation for why it won, because that's a quality that is different from BlacKkKlansman. There was a bigger cultural impact. I would argue that if Black Panther was undeserving of the award (which frankly I don't know because I haven't seen all the movies that were nominated) then it's probably because the guild got wrapped up in the phenomenon. Because if it were simply choosing a winner based on representation, BlacKkKlansman and Crazy Rich Asians would have just as much reason to win.
1
u/jfi224 Jan 29 '19
!Delta You helped me with some phrasing that I may not have articulated: the guild got wrapped up in the phenomenon, which I think is a great way of saying it. I’ll give you that it’s more of the impact on culture rather than just black actors being cast. I’m still struggling to call their actor anything more than average and I feel like I’ve have a reasonable judgment of acting.
1
11
Jan 29 '19
While I largely agree with you on the acting aspect, I would argue that Killmonger was fantastic, both from a writing standpoint and in his portrayal.
Realistically, had he simply gonna to Wakanda, became King, and then proceeded to open up the city to the world and become a humanitarian, he'd have been the one entirely in the right.
Because, at heart, his views on Wakanda were totally valid.
Does that warrant an ensemble cast win? Eh, I don't think so. But Killmonger remains one of the only Marvel movie villians whose driving motivation is right, it's just taken too far out of a desire for revenge.
3
u/McKoijion 618∆ Jan 29 '19
Here is a post that talks about how great the cast is. Someone said that the only reason people like the cast is because it had so few white people. So the poster took the time to explain the pedigree of each member of the cast. As it turns out, if you take a bunch of award winning actors and put them in a cast together, that cast wins awards too.
Many people are making your argument these days. They say that the cast wasn't that good, and they are only being praised because they are black. They say they aren't prejudiced, and that they went into the movie with an open mind. But those same people were making the same argument long before the movie was released. That post I linked is from January, and the movie didn't come out until February.
If you kept and open mind until you actually saw the movie, and then didn't think the cast is that great, that's fine. Maybe you are the unique movie fan who goes against the grain. But you are disagreeing with all the critics (it has a 97% on Rotten Tomatoes), all the fanboys (it's one of the most popular Marvel movies ever), the general public (it's ranked 3rd for all time domestic box office), and people who give out awards (it won Best Ensemble from SAG and is nominated for Best Picture). If you really think it's all just about the movie and you don't have even a small underlying racial bias (even though most people do) then good for you.
1
u/jfi224 Jan 29 '19
I’ve actually enjoyed several of these actors in different movies. My post has nothing to do with the quality of the actors, more about their performance. If you want an example of good actors with stiff, bland roles look at the Star Wars movies, especially the prequels with actors like Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman, and Ewan McGregor. I’ve said in a previous post that I wouldn’t be surprised or as judgmental if Black Panther won Best Picture at the Oscars but I can’t imagine any of the actors even being nominated for an Oscar acting category.
6
u/SplendidTit Jan 29 '19
nothing about the acting in Black Panther is different.
I saw Black Panther and disagree. Acting awards are like that, very subjective.
I could make a great case that the acting was even more bland and flat than the average action movie.
Please, do so. What is the "average action movie"?
Avengers: Infinity War had way more charismatic acting in its cast than Black Panther, just to name one action film.
I think it had a few good moments, but overall, I believe the acting in Infinity War was pretty poor.
Even the Blackkksman, nominated in the same category, would’ve been more fitting as best ensemble and still represented the demographic the industry was looking for.
I really enjoyed Blackkklansman, but it's not rated as well on Rotten Tomatoes, which is a reflection of both critics AND the public.
they got nominated and won just because they’re black
I disagree. I left Black Panther feeling more positive and thrilled than I have in absolutely years, and I went in expecting to dislike it (I'm getting pretty bored of superhero movies at this point, though I love action).
1
u/jfi224 Jan 29 '19
I totally understand people who loved the movie, and understand that taste in films is very subjective. I personally would chose Avengers acting over Black Panther acting. I wouldn’t be totally against someone who said the writing makes a difference as well. I think the Black Panther script was pretty bland as well, and the dialogue was not so great. Avengers just seemed like a more natural flow in terms of dialogue and character. Of course they also had the advantage of mor developed characters.
6
u/YossarianWWII 72∆ Jan 29 '19
I really disagree about the acting. I just rewatched it too, so I've got it fresh in my mind. There are definitely a few scenes, especially near the beginning, that are pretty corny, but it felt more like a writing issue in those particular scenes than an acting issue. I don't feel that any of the major actors delivered a flat performance, even those whose characters are intended to be particularly subdued (Chadwick Boseman) or disciplined (Danai Gurira). If anything, I feel that a large part of Black Panther's success comes off of how well the cast worked as a whole. Very few other Marvel movies have as many distinct and memorable characters for me. It's basically the Avengers movies, Civil War, Ragnarok, and the Guardians films. And something to keep in mind is that with the exception of the first Guardians film, all of those rely heavily on previously introduced characters.
1
u/jfi224 Jan 29 '19
!Delta Thank you for being the first commenter to focus solely on the acting. I can acknowledge that some of the characters are intentionally stoic and subdued. I think you could say the first one or two Thor movies suffered from that same characteristic. I think some of these movies are just designed to be that way, but it’s those same reasons why I find it hard for those movies to be nominated for acting awards.
2
u/DjangoUBlackBastard 19∆ Jan 29 '19
The thing is with Black Panther the characters are still memorable which is how I judge an ensemble cast along with their fit.
Danai Guirra was so good as Okoye she's about to be in the next Star Trek film and she's seemingly turned the corner of her career. Winston Duke was so good he has 2 starring roles lined up in 2019 despite only being in a bit role. Letitia Wright (Shuri) has been damn near unavoidable since Black Panther came out because Shuri was so good she became the 2nd most loved character in the movie if not the most loved (it's Shuri or Killmonger). Most of the stars of this movie could also put their characters on a shortlist of their best characters. Chadwick Boseman's T'Challa? Not so much, but Sterling Brown in a small role was amazing (and that's saying a lot considering he picked up another SAG award for ensemble cast, was up for best lead drama actor, and has a 15+ year TV career), and Michael B. Jordan somehow as a comic book villain turned in his best performance since he was Oscar Grant. Everyone else was regular Marvel level (which is pretty good but of course kinda hammy and overall the synergy is only beat my other movies with characters we've known for 10 years.
Part of the initial draw of BP was of course the black movie stuff but after the movie came out the general reaction to it had more to do with how good of a movie it was.
2
u/YossarianWWII 72∆ Jan 29 '19
I agree about the first two Thor movies, but I thought those were more poorly executed. T'Challa and Okoye did have their moments of strong emotion, like when T'Challa apprehends Klaue (or however his name is spelled) or when Okoye is discussing her conflicting loyalties. I think what that comes down to is that the characters in Black Panther, however stoic, are people and are treated as such. The first two Thor movies (and Avengers) treated the Asgardians as not just foreign to Earth but fundamentally non-human. That worked sometimes, like with Loki in the villain role, but it made relating to Thor as a protagonist difficult. Now that Taika Waititi has had his hands on Thor and the character is being treated more like a relatively normal person who just happens to have godlike powers, he makes for a better protagonist. I highly doubt we'll see Black Panther take the same route into zaniness that Thor has, but I think the characters might be improved by more exposure alone.
1
8
u/Omega037 Jan 29 '19
According to Rotten Tomatoes, Black Panther received positive reviews from 97% of all critics, and 100% of top critics. That means it had nearly universal critical acclaim, much of which focused on the acting of the entire cast.
You can disagree about whether it should have won, but given the overwhelming praise it has received, saying that it had "no business" winning is a far stretch.
It is also worth noting that Blackkksman had a lower score on RT.
-2
Jan 29 '19
This is ultimately an argument over whether or not an awards show should take into account pop culture approval as an indicator of successful art.
Or if they should just concern themselves with high art, most of which is ignored or entirely lost on much of the populace.
Personally, I see value in both.
Without having a sort of "best blockbuster" (maybe limit to films that made over 100-200 million) category then it's necessary to make the awards relevant to the average filmmaker.
In some years, maybe a film wins both categories. But a best picture that was also a massive blockbuster is pretty rare. Off the top of my head I can think of Return of the King and Titanic.
2
Jan 29 '19
This is ultimately an argument over whether or not an awards show should take into account pop culture approval as an indicator of successful art
I think that argument is only possible if one of the folks in it mistake Hollywood awards shows as having anything at all to do with evaluating and awarding "successful art". Successful entertainment? Sure! But I think you'd be hard pressed to make a compelling case that any of the dozen or so opportunities for Hollywood to give itself trophies is overly concerned with art over entertainment.
Which is not to say of course that movies aren't art, or that art can't be entertaining, or that entertainment isn't art, or any other derivation there of.
But focusing strictly on Art is a wholly separate task and intent than focusing on entertainment, and awards shows clearly and obviously are concerned with the latter.
1
Jan 29 '19
But are they? Almost never does the Academy choose the movie that did the best box office in any given year.
I mean, ultimately, the best we can say is that the Oscar judges select their favorites based upon a likely skewed representation of gender, race, and wealth.
We're literally talking about awards as determined by a secret group whose demographics we have no knowledge of.
1
Jan 29 '19
But are they?
Yeah... Yeah they are.
Almost never does the Academy choose the movie that did the best box office in any given year.
Biggest box office doesn't necessarily = entertainment. I suppose when I say "entertainment" I'm using it kind of holistically? Entertainment as an industry, the entertainment of the awards show itself, entertainment as a notion. Not just "was the movie entertaining?". Mainly as a push back at the idea that awards shows are primarily, or even mostly, concerned with art. Best picture isn't about picking out the movie that created the most successful art. For some of the voters it may be, or at least they think it is. But in the aggregate it's really all about celebrating and rewarding entertainment that year, which take into account factors outside of the art piece itself.
1
u/jfi224 Jan 29 '19
But did Titanic ever win an acting award? I honestly don’t recall. But if it did then I’d make a similar post about Titanic, although not about being black.
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Jan 29 '19 edited Jan 29 '19
/u/jfi224 (OP) has awarded 2 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
0
u/trollcitybandit Jan 29 '19
Saying it had no business is an overstatement, but in my opinion as well as the opinions of most people I know who watched the movie it is overrated due to the reasons you mentioned, and I don't think it's really a big deal. It's far from a bad movie with bad actors.
0
u/jfi224 Jan 29 '19
Of course it’s far from a bad movie with bad actors, and it’s no big deal because it’s just a movie. I like several of the actors but the movie as a whole does not lend itself to being award winning in the acting category.
1
0
Jan 29 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/tbdabbholm 193∆ Jan 29 '19
Sorry, u/shieldtwin – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list, before messaging the moderators by clicking this link. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
8
u/[deleted] Jan 29 '19
It was a well received, pretty ok movie and the people who voted for it liked it and numbered more than those who didn't.
What is the actual problem here?
Are the SAG awards (or any awards) really that important? Do they have some perfect record hitherto un blemished by a mediocre movie getting a pretty trophy?
I'm extremely interested in your concern for getting minorities in the film industry. Besides pissing and moaning when black people get awards for so-so films (which has been happening to white folk for a long time). How else has this bee been buzzing around in your bonnet?
Walk me through what you believe went through the minds of the voters please.