Dissing Lauren Bacall
Image via Wikipedia
Writing about awards shows is not my beat. However, something so disturbing and disrespectful happened last night that I can’t resist calling it out.
Lauren Bacall, an actress so respected that she was recently chosen by the American Film Institute as one of the top twenty-five actresses of the past 100 years, was given the Academy’s Governor’s Award – and then completely disrespected.
Actually, she was given the award back in November of 2009 at one of those luncheons nobody notices.
In recognition of Bacall’s years of phenomenal work, she was permitted to stand up next to her seat and get a little applause during last night’s unbelievably dull proceedings. Oh, they also showed a little video of the November gathering where Bacall said a few words.
Was there something happening on the stage that was so exciting that a few minutes could not be spared to allow Bacall, a truly legendary star, to speak and collect the respect she is due from the film industry? Or was it really more important to waste five minutes on a Ben Stiller bit that has to be one of his worst ever? Or the Neil Patrick Harris song that Randy Jackson would have criticized for being ‘pitchy’ – and that’s the nicest thing we can say about it.
I understand ratings. I know that it is important to pack the stage with presenters who will attract a younger audience – although I couldn’t help but notice that few, if any, of them could help a producer raise one dollar to finance a movie.
But if you are going to spend a bunch of airtime rolling retrospectives on film genres, including horror pictures, would it kill you to give a few minutes to an actor who was a pioneer of the ‘film noir’ genre?
There will be much condemnation of the Academy Awards show in the days to come. Let’s face it – it was truly a bad show. But for all the miscues and bad choices, including the remarkably insensitive omission of Farrah Fawcett from the ‘In Memoriam’ segment (yes, Fawcett did make a few movies, some of which were very good) failing to pay respect to an American legend should be right at the top of a very long list.
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
Let’s start a “Draft Craig Ferguson” movement to get him to host next year. The man gives the most thoughtful and interesting interviews on late night, and the rest of his show is very funny, especially considering that he has no budget and improvises with $5 hand puppets. And did you see his headlining performance when he hosted the White House Correspondents Association dinner? He was fantastic. He’d be great at hosting the Oscars.
I agree! He’s great.
In response to another comment. See in context »great idea. but won’t happen because he’s not a ‘movie’ guy. He would, however, be superb for the Emmys.
In response to another comment. See in context »yeah but if they can have jon stewart and ellen degeneres they should be able to invite Craig Ferguson to host!
In response to another comment. See in context »You know, you are absolutely right. I had completely forgotten about these two television stars hosting the Academy Awards.
In response to another comment. See in context »OK – I’m on board. Craig Ferguson for host!!!
hahaha. you are the easiest man to persuade, ever! laugh.
In response to another comment. See in context »And now that I think about it, there was Johnny Carson and David Letterman. Apparently, I had a brain hemorrhage there for a few moments!
In response to another comment. See in context »Ferguson has also made several movies, although they were mostly in England-land. He personally wrote two of them, and directed one of them. And then he wrote a novel that was well-received. I also find that I agree with what movie sensibilities he’s expressed on his show. When Gerard Butler was rumored to be the next Snake Plissken, Ferguson said that Snake could only be played by an American, despite actually being friends with Butler.
I honestly don’t know why Ferguson isn’t a bigger deal these days. Both Obama and McCain skipped his show during the election but not Conan’s, even though Ferguson’s ratings were just as good. On top of that, Ferguson had just become an American citizen, an accomplishment about which he’s still hugely proud. He even got Ben Franklin’s “Join or Die” cartoon tattooed on his forearm. Their handlers must have known something that I don’t.
In response to another comment. See in context »I couldn’t agree more with the entire writing. The omission of Farrah Fawcett, as well as the condescending treatment of Lauren Bacall, were just a couple of the more disturbing events of the evening. I also found the “Vegas Showgirls” dancing around the stage in the first part of the show to be in poor taste.
Grrr.
This story reminds me of the 1994 Grammys, when they gave Frank Sinatra the “Legends Lifetime Achievement Award” but wouldn’t let him sing onstage. Sinatra was 78 at the time, four years from death, on a national stage, receiving recognition for a lifetime of work, and they wouldn’t let him perform a song or two. A horrible decision, and a missed opportunity!
Here’s the recording of it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdRk2oo3jRg
[...] Ecrire sur les remises de prix n'est pas mon rythme. Cependant, quelque chose de si troublant et irrespectueux qui s'est passé la nuit dernière que je ne peux pas résister, mais appelez-le. Lauren Bacall, actrice si respecté que elle a récemment été choisi par l'American Film Institute comme l'un des vingt-cinq plus actrices du passé 100 ans, a reçu le [. . . ] URL article original: http://trueslant.com/rickungar/2010/03/08/dissing-lauren-bacall/ [...]
Friends of mine in the industry in LA told me Ms. Bacall was not feeling well. She was offered time and declined it. The clip was shown in place of the expected speech. Speaking in front of a small group (well, small by LA standards) at a luncheon and at a large hall televised to the world are two different propositions. At 85, Ms. Bacall simply may not have wished to not appear to be at her best. Not everyone has Kirk Douglas’ bravery.
I agree the show was awful and there is much to criticize, but the lack of a Bacall speech may not have been the fault of the show’s producer.
That would certainly put a different spin on it. Although, if true, one wonders why the other recipients were not given the opportunity to speak. But…I’m sure we’ll hear more about it over the coming days. Thanks for the info.
In response to another comment. See in context »If you ask me this comes under “policy”, and what a beautiful picture!
englishismylife-
When I’m wrong…I’m wrong. Happens all the time!
No no, you weren’t wrong. You had blocked all of their appearances for obvious reasons.
In response to another comment. See in context »Actually, I kind or liked Letterman when he did it!
In response to another comment. See in context »Ugh. Remember he tried to do a version of his “stupid pet tricks” and that weird “uma..oprah” thing? in an ironic twist to this entire convo, letterman’s company produces the “late late show with craig ferguson”! HA
In response to another comment. See in context »This was the worst Oscars I’ve seen in 30 years of watching (I’m not counting the first 12 years of my life) and am appalled at: the lack of a video montage of previous Oscar-winning movies, the undignified and way-too-fast handling of the memorial (no offense to the wonderful James Taylor, but seriously? A live act during this? Not your own song? I love James, but come on!), and the lack of a dignified Lifetime Achievement Award. These are my 3 favorites and a good part of why I watch these awards.
I was recoiling in disgust at the young, unproven, classless actors (can’t read a teleprompter? Learn the lines. Coughing and twitching? Repeating what the other presenter just said? No class) who were chosen as presenters. It was embarrassing to tell my 82 year old Dad that I didn’t know, exactly who they were.
Maybe they couldn’t find enough good actors for the presentations? Ha.
Having the wonderful Ms. Bacall not have her due and get her statue on stage was frightful, even for Dad.
As far as presenters go, I’d rather see Elizabeth Taylor in an iron lung than see these talentless, fly-by-night teens try to act poorly in a presentation they will never get.
And another thing (sounding like Archie Bunker), the camera people should all be fired or, more likely, the supervisor in charge.
On T.V., it was a shamble. Constant shots of Clooney frowning, and every time a black person would win something, they’d do a close up of every black person in the audience. How embarrassing!
I mean, embarrassing for the camera crew.
We barely saw the beginning of the memorial because the cameras were all on the wonderful Mr. James Taylor, and when we did finally see the screen, it was from a very long distance.
I can’t get over the people they left out, what a joke. These Oscars were the worst I’ve ever seen.
Those Clooney shots were an “inside staged job”, I think that’s what they call it, that right Rick?
In response to another comment. See in context »It doesn’t matter to an average viewer if was an inside joke or not.
In response to another comment. See in context »Maybe it’s funny to those who are in on the joke or maybe it’s nice for whoever is managing the camera men but for everyone else watching, we didn’t need to see 100 shots of Clooney while ignoring other actors.
I don’t think they were planned – it was just Clooney playing to the camera. The problem was, it didn’t work and, rather than entertain, it confused the audience.
In response to another comment. See in context »The also left Bea Aurthur off the list of deceased list.
The Academy is saying that they can only put up 30 people a year into the piece and they have to make decisions. Since Fawcett and Arthur were primarily TV stars, the Academy says they were left off.
In response to another comment. See in context »That seems crazy. I always assumed that any member of the Academy who passed away was in the piece as that makes sense. Otherwise, who decides who belongs and who doesn’t and why the 30 person limit? Silly.
I see.
Agreed, the so-called 30-person limit is another lame excuse, as is their time-limit. They made the limits, they don’t have to set any arbitrary number. As far as time goes, it takes about 5-10 seconds to show a couple of pictures or even a short clip. With so many people obviously interested in this segment (as opposed to song-and-dance/interpretive dance routines), they (the producers) could make it longer and more inclusive.
In response to another comment. See in context »