MovieChat Forums > Everything Everywhere All at Once (2022) Discussion > Michelle only won because she’s Asian

Michelle only won because she’s Asian

posted a year ago by JasonMovieGuy88 (51)
8 replies | jump to latest

I’m really upset Cate Blanchett lost the Oscar (TAR) to Michelle Yeoh due to political reasons. So many films now are winning based on their political agendas and not the actual storytelling or how the acting is displayed. Take for example CODA. Did that win because of the great acting, or it’s agenda to honor the deaf? Easily the latter.

I even remember reading actual voters saying “I know Yeoh doesn’t give the best performance, but I’m going to vote for her anyways because - well you know.”
Yeah we know - you liberal cowards.

The Oscars used to give out awards based on merit and now it’s changing again. I’m glad Anthony Hopkins won for The Father when all the generation Z tweeters wanted Chadwick Boseman to win “because he’s black and dead”. They hadn’t even watched Ma Raineys Black Bottom, they just wanted a black man to win for the wrong reasons. The voters got it right in 2021, but failed this year.

The only actor who deserved her Oscar for this over the top Crouching Tiger rip off was Jamie Lee Curtis as the IRS auditor.

Blanchett swept the critics and won the BAFTA and Golden Globe. Then loses to Yeoh so that the voters can say “phew! Another woman of color can finally prevail. Let’s figure out our next eyesore. Oh yes, an openly gay male needs to win. Wait Brandan Fraser won for The Whale, never mind.”

Yeoh is okay in this movie but she did not deserve her Oscar and it’s insulting she wins because of her race and NOT because of her actual performance.

Blanchett has only won twice -

Blue Jasmine (2013-14)
The Aviator (2004-5)

She also should have won for Elizabeth, but lost to Gwyneth Paltrow in Shakespeare in Love- another example of political voting. Paltrow won due to Harvey Weinsteins hate towards Saving Private Ryan.

[–] BrandNewPoster (10996) a year ago

Totally disagree. Michelle Yeoh was excellent in this and a deserving winner.

[–] Heisenberg (6730) a year ago

Oscars=shit

[–] jacotodd47 (1843) a year ago

Yeah, the Academy Awards don't seem to mean what they used to. First of all, it seems there are too many awards programs now. The other thing is having 10 best movie nominees as opposed to 5. Plus, that tasteless, scripted Will Smith slap last year - what a joke. I can only say, as a little boy in the 1970s, the Oscars were absolutely huge. Oscar night was a big deal. I don't think the youth of today gives a SH&^^$T about the Academy Awards. I could be wrong though. I suppose, lastly, I should add another problem - movies aren't all that good anymore. For me, you have to go all the way back to 2007 to find a terrific Best Movie winner (No Country for Old Men).

[–] spurtle467 (1547) a year ago

The rise of social media and increase in channels and streaming sites has made the Oscars less popular than it once was. It's one of many victims of this.

The standard of filmmaking has also dropped significantly in my opinion. Creativity has plummeted. Disney is the best example of this. Finding the good films is becoming more a needle in a haystack type job. We now, and again thanks to the emergence of these many streaming sites, have far too much quantity and not enough quality.

[–] Luffy (1236) a year ago

The Oscars were never about merit. If they were, Scorsese would have multiple wins by now. Kubrick and Hitchcock would have established records. The major reason Oscars exist is because their creator, Louis B. Mayer, was quoted saying he did it so he could get his actors to do whatever project he wanted. Hardly a germination of creativity and a championing of artistic merit.

Blanchett is a better actress than Oh Yeah or whatever she's called, but one reason why the latter got the award was because the average age of the judges has declined. Blanchett's Elizabeth was undermined by an unflattering and bad script with ordinary dialogue and characterisation. No surprise with a guy like Shekar Kapur at the helm.

The Oscars will always snub actors like Pacino and reward him and others like Paul Newman with an undeserved 'lifetime achievement' best actor win. They are clueless and they exist mainly to sell their image as the 7th art and show off their women as fuck goddesses with the red carpet events and perpetuate the desirability of Caucasian beauty.

[–] spurtle467 (1547) a year ago

I never saw all the performances of the nominees last year but there's no question the show has got more politicised. I saw some of EEAAO and couldn't manage to finish it. It was nothing special and for a sci-fi film that appeared to borrow heavily from The Matrix, which itself was never even nominated back in the day, that to me felt like a political winner than anything. A genre usually ignored by TO but stick an ethnic cast in it and bingo, just as Black Panther, the first superhero movie to be nominated, and also overrated (I wouldn't even have it in a top 5 Marvel movies) was a political nomination because of the black cast.

[–] KingBob (2125) 8 months ago

Highly doubt that. First of all she was incredible secondly the left hates Asians so being Asian actually worked against her.

[–] Magicdave (848) 8 months ago

I actually like Michelle Yeoh. Have followed her career before and after "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon", and thought if she won an Oscar, it would have been for that film. After all, the film did win for best foreign film.
My wife and I stopped watching awards shows after they became basically 2-to-3-hour political rants interrupted by commercials and an occasional snippet of a movie or a song.
But I agree with you. "Everything, Everywhere All At Once" was a cluttered mess, as far as I was concerned. Another one of those politically motivated awards because of prevailing social influences.
I wish the Academy would not bow to pressure and vote for the actual BEST performances. The landscape of the Oscars would be duly credited again as it has been in the past.