Further Thoughts on the 2017 Oscar Nominees

“Nominees,” not “nominations,” because today, I’m not looking at who did or did not get recognized, deservedly or otherwise.  Instead, I’m thinking about two particular films – and two particular nominees from those films – and how to consider them moving forward.

If that slightly-ominous opening paragraph wasn’t enough of an indicator, I’m talking about Manchester by the Sea and Hacksaw Ridge, with Best Actor nominee Casey Affleck and Best Director nominee Mel Gibson.  Gibson’s decade-long slump in Hollywood following his drunk driving arrest and subsequent anti-Semitic rant is well-known, and Affleck reached an undisclosed settlement with two women who accused him of sexual harassment after their experiences working on one of his films in 2010.

I’ll be the first to admit that I don’t take any sort of consistent stance on actors and directors who’ve done or been accused of awful things.  I’ve never really been one for Seinfeld reruns since Michael Richards’s racist tirade, but I’ve seen a handful of Woody Allen movies, and while Johnny Depp’s stock has plummeted for me in recent months, his presence didn’t keep me away from Fantastic Beasts.  There are scenarios in which I could picture myself watching both Manchester by the Sea and Hacksaw Ridge. 

This is partly, of course, because pretty much no film is down to just one person.  I may very understandably have problems with Affleck and Gibson and not want to support their films with my dollars, but it’s not just their work on display.  I’m a definite fan of Andrew Garfield, who’s nominated for his performance in Hacksaw Ridge, and Manchester by the Sea is also recognized for its direction, screenplay, and two other actors (Lucas Hedges and Michelle Williams, who’s on my “everyone who appeared in The Station Agent is forever awesome” list.)  In choosing not to support Affleck and Gibson, I’m turning away from their work in these films as well.

But there are a couple factors pushing me the other way here.  The first is Nate Parker, another controversial entertainer who had a film that came out this last year.  I very decidedly did not see Birth of a Nation due to the rape allegations for Parker and his co-writer, and I felt very sure in my decision not to see it.  But having made that choice, it feels disingenuous to turn a blind eye where these other two men’s behavior is concerned, especially so soon after Parker kept me away from Birth of a Nation.  Why would I give them a pass and not him?  (Not that I’m saying I should’ve given Parker a pass, not at all – just that it would be hypocritical of me not to make the same decision with Affleck and Gibson.)

The other factor is the orange elephant in the room, and honestly, it’s probably the factor giving me the most resolve not to see the films.  It skeeves me out that Gibson’s seeming return to the Hollywood fold is happening at the same time the so-called “alt-right” feels empowered to claim legitimacy, and it skeeves me out that Affleck could very well win Best Actor in this the unfortunate age of “locker-room talk.”  Maybe it’s a reaction to my own sense of relative powerlessness against all that.  I can call my representative, protest, and donate to worthy causes, but he’ll still be there, rather like these two men will continue to be nominated whether I see their films or not.  But even if it won’t change anything in the grand scheme of things, this is something I can do, for my sake if nothing else.  I can say “no,” at least, to this.