January 30, 2016 at 11:48 am #213798This post was found to be inappropriate by the moderators and has been removed.January 30, 2016 at 1:29 pm #213800
In a perfect world this would be possible. The gender of a performer should not be important.
But the bias toward male actors would be huge. And even without the bias, there are far more juicy roles for men.
Cate Blanchett Christian Bale
Leonardo Di Caprio Rooney Mara
Michael Fassbender Mark Rylance
Brie Larson Sylvester Stallone
Saoirse Ronan Alicia Vikander
Eddie Redmayne Patricia Arquette
Bradley Cooper Ethan Hawke
Benedict Cumberbatch Edward Norton
Michael Keaton JK Simmons
Julianne Moore Emma Stone
Cate Blanchett Barkhad Abdi
Sandra Bullock Michael Fassbender
Judi Dench Jennifer Lawrence
Leonardo DiCaprio Jared Leto
Matthew McConaughey Lupita Nyong’o
Jessica Chastain Robert De Niro
Bradley Cooper Sally Field
Daniel Day Lewis Anne Hathaway
Hugh Jackman Tommy Lee Jones
Jennifer Lawrence Christoph Waltz
George Clooney Berenice Bejo
Viola Davis Jessica Chastain
Jean Dujardin Nick Nolte
Meryl Streep Christopher Plummer
Brad Pitt Octavia Spencer
Annette Bening Christian Bale
Jeff Bridges Melissa Leo
Jesse Eisenberg Jeremy Renner
Colin Firth Geoffrey Rush
Natalie Portman Jacki WeaverJanuary 30, 2016 at 1:33 pm #213801
If film and acting awards in general had never existed until now, and the awards were still segregated by gender, people would probably criticise the awards as being sexist. And to be honest, they wouldn’t be wrong.
A potential problem in years/decades to come is if non-binary trans folk become more visible on screen (hopefully!) yet they cannot be nominated as either Best Actor or Best Actress because either option would conflict with their gender identity. What to do then? Create a special achievement award for Best Non-Binary Actor? Seems a bit of a ghetto to me.
Anyway, if acting awards were not based on gender now, I guess this year’s nominees would look something like this:
So according to this there would actually be more female nominees in both categories, but that would probably be an exception.
As for past winners in this scenario:
2014: Moore & Simmons
2013: Blanchett & Leto
2012: Day-Lewis & Hathaway
2011: Streep & Plummer
2010: Firth & Bale
2009: Bridges & Mo’Nique
2008: Winslet & Ledger
2007: Day-Lewis & Bardem
2006: Mirren & Hudson
2005: Hoffman & Clooney
2004: Foxx & Blanchett
2003: Theron & Zellweger
2002: Brody & Zeta-Jones
2001: Berry & Connelly
2000: Roberts & Del Toro
This is assuming the different lineups wouldn’t have resulted in completely different winners.
January 30, 2016 at 1:44 pm #213802
Acting branch is probably the most gender balanced branch in the academy. Their representative is a woman.
You can’t make movies without actressess, whether it’s the role of a supportive wife or a crazy nun.
That being said, we’d have still seen little bit of male advantage since there are far more great roles for men than for women(esp in lead category) but that gap wouldn’t be that huge. We’d have also seen the examples of sexism and women mainly voting for women and men voting for both men and pretty women lol.
In the end ”It’s not weight-lifting”January 30, 2016 at 2:14 pm #213803
It would be an absolute nightmare. Just imagine #OscarsSoMale
“Only 2 women in 10 slots”
“Only 5 women nominated in 2 years”
Would be terrible. It’s perfect to have a split.January 30, 2016 at 2:19 pm #213804
But, then, why don’t we have splits for other categories, too, if it’s about equality?
Best Male Writer
Best Female WriterJanuary 30, 2016 at 3:05 pm #213805
Leonardo DiCaprio (Winner)
Alicia Vikander (Winner)
Julianne Moore (Winner)
J.K. Simmons (Winner)
Cate Blanchett (Winner)
Jared Leto (Winner)
Daniel Day-Lewis (Winner)
Robert De Niro
Anne Hathaway (Winner)
Philip Seymour Hoffman
Tommy Lee Jones
Meryl Streep (Winner)
Christopher Plummer (Winner)
Colin Firth (Winner)
Christian Bale (Winner)
Hailee SteinfeldJanuary 30, 2016 at 3:50 pm #213806
Jennifer Jason Leigh
Alicia VikanderJanuary 30, 2016 at 4:17 pm #213807This post was found to be inappropriate by the moderators and has been removed.January 30, 2016 at 6:35 pm #213808
I imagine that it would be incredibly male-heavy in terms of nominations, but then there would be another entire political ballgame. I mean, it is true, male and female performances are worthy of comparison to one another…
2014: Julianne Moore and JK Simmons
2013: Cate Blanchett and Jared Leto
2012: Daniel Day-Lewis and Anne Hathaway
2011: Jean Dujardin and Christopher Plummer
2010: Colin Firth and Christian Bale
2009 would be a fustercluck.
I do think this year it would be Brie Larson and Alicia Vikander.January 30, 2016 at 7:34 pm #213809This post was found to be inappropriate by the moderators and has been removed.January 30, 2016 at 7:40 pm #213810
The thing is, they’ll never limit the number of acting awards to two. That’s what brings the ratings more than anything else.January 30, 2016 at 8:10 pm #213811
I don’t know that the experiment would be worth it though. The grammys combined the male/female rock performances how many years ago and women hardly ever break in. But despite the disparity they haven’t changed it back…whose to say having men consistently out number women at the oscars would actually encourage change. I mean so long as there’s one woman in the group I think people would look the other way.January 31, 2016 at 11:59 am #213812
I find it uthopic.
But, yes, it’s the only gendered category. There’s no female cinematographer or male composer. And, yes, males are more present than women, but times are a changing.January 31, 2016 at 2:51 pm #213813
Brie Larson standing next to Leonardo DiCaprio, ugh. As always, the actress winner is in her twenties and is on her second acclaimed performance. The actor is almost twice her age and on his ninth SAG nomination. This says a few things about Hollywood, basically that the roles are not there for women and the roles are even less there for older women because the young are preferred.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.