Andrea Riseborough reacts to controversy over her Oscar nomination: ‘It was confusing’

Given that the surprise of Andrea Riseborough’s nomination for the next Oscars took place on January 24th It rained a lot. The nomination, initially hailed as a win for independent cinema, was soon eclipsed in the shadow of controversy, with Riseborough being the epicenter.

The controversial campaign conducted by the ‘To Leslie’ team has caused social media, the media and critics in general to turn to the leading actress. Social media lit up with fiery accusations against racial nepotism, cultural exclusion and cronyism in the industry which, presumably, has been used by a Riseborough who has so far been unwilling to fight back.

The Hollywood Reporter publishes the first interview of the actress after the controversy. In it, the director, Michael Morris, and co-star, Marc Maron, accompany Riseborough in the task of narrating ‘To Leslie’ from its pre-production to the controversy shaking them today.

The makers of the film never fail to highlight the hard work they put in to get to where they are now. ‘To Leslie’ is a project, according to them, of a minuscule size and funding. Riseborough and Morris pay for the production and distribution of the film out of his own pocketfinally delegating to a distributor that did not give them good results, Momentum Pictures: “There was no possibility of greater visibility because this distributor was and continued to be bad”says Maron as Riseborough laments the $27,322 the film earned in its only week in theaters: “It’s always disappointing when your work isn’t monetized”.

In the interview, the actress confesses that there’s no money for big billboards or opulent marketing campaigns. However, the event seed of controversythat ‘To Leslie’ didn’t want to pass up was its screening on the American Film Academy website, with a price tag of $20,000: “After being so successful at SXSW and Raindance, seeing the impact the film was having on audiences and receiving such great reviews, we all tried to contribute in whatever way we could. I went to screenings and answered and listened to incredibly cathartic and I’ve heard stories of people coming to see her and sharing their own stories with addiction.”the actress thus justifies the interest of these screenings, which have been much commented among those dissatisfied with her nomination.

The three professionals agree that the film will arrive in January a different point, the stage of exploitation and dissemination. Instagram has begun to fill up with positive comments towards the film promoted by the ‘Oblivion’ actress, causing her satisfaction: “It’s wonderful that the film looks at, I guess it’s like that very bright ray of light. When any of us get involved in something, we want that work to be absorbed in some way, but you can’t control how it’s going to take people.”. Morris delves into one of the vertices of the controversy, the diffusion on social networks: “It’s a platform where people can connect with other people and excitedly say, ‘Check it out.’ The audience can pick up those threads and then amplify them if they want to.”

The point Morris tries to make is understood, it is of reason. However, “To Leslie” makes a mistake and becomes indiscreet when the public and the media witness the interactions of the members, not only from the sphere of Hollywood, but from the Academy itself. Sarah Paulson (“American Horror Story”) was one of the Academy members who showed her public support for “To Leslie” on Instagram: “THIS IS REALLY EXCITING”commented.

After the public trial and the statement of the president of the Academy, Bill Kramer, announcing the appointment of Riseborough it is lawful and continues in the fight for a golden statuetteMaron sends a poison dart to the organization: “If you have to lay down the basics of how social networks work for the voting process, do it for the next one […] But some of us put our hand in the fire, you know… How could that happen?”Maron supports the attitude of the Academy.

nominations like milk

Integration should be one of the fundamental pillars today, also in the field of culture. The Oscars are the cinematic gala par excellence, that night all eyes turn to the city of Los Angeles, a celebration that lacks a lot of color. Of the twenty nominated actors (lead actor/actress and supporting actor/actress) only two are black: Angela Bassett for ‘Black Panther: Wakanda Forever’ and Brian Tyree Henry for ‘Causeway’. The rest of the candidates, except the three of “All at once everywhere” (Ke Huy Quan, Stephanie Hsu and Michelle Yeoh) they are white. No sign of Viola Davis’ ‘The King Woman’ or Danielle Deadwyler, who should have been nominated for ‘Till – The Crime That Changed Everything’.

The other major injustice comes in the Best Director category. It seems that Kramer and her cast of academics have no interest in films directed by women. Too bad for the Americans who can’t follow the “made in Spain” example of the Goyas, where female directors occupied more than fifty percent of the category. None of the five nominees for Best Director at the American Academy is a woman. It is true that none of the most important films of this edition is directed by a woman, however the root problem must be taken into account: the opportunities for leadership positions available to men and women in the film industry remain unequal.