Black Swan deceived Oscars?

[Guest]

How do people feel when the studios use shots in a trailer that are not in the movie.

 

Is that deceptive advertising?

 

R,

[Brian Drysdale]

How do people feel when the studios use shots in a trailer that are not in the movie.

 

Is that deceptive advertising?

 

R,

 

It's even worse when they tell the entire story in the trailer.

[John Sprung]

How do people feel when the studios use shots in a trailer that are not in the movie.

 

Back when I was in features -- mid 1980's -- it was a point of honor among trailer editors to only use material that was in the final cut. On the executive side, the issue never even came up. Personally, it wouldn't bother me if take 4 was in the show, and take 2 was in the trailer, given that the same people were doing the same things in both. Using a lifted scene in the trailer would be kinda deceptive, but mostly just plain dumb. Also fine by me to shoot something specifically and obviously for the trailer, like having an actor say right to the camera, "Wanna see what happens next? Ya gotta come see the movie..."

 

 

 

 

 

-- J.S.

[Phil Rhodes]

I don't get what the problem is here.

 

There is no problem with people being subbed by doubles for things they can't do. This is normal, everyday, no problem.

 

The point at issue is how much credit this woman got, and if she got very little for what may have been a significant contribution, well, OK, maybe.

 

In the meantime, we seem to have forgotten that this entire topic was very comprehensively aired in 1952 in the film Singin' in the Rain.

[John Holland]

Great point Phil. I hope that stops this silly thread .

[Guest]

I have someone else writing all of my comments for me on this website, does that make them any less valid? I don't credit this person either, in fact he's writing this one right now.

 

R,

[Guest]

Personally, it wouldn't bother me if take 4 was in the show, and take 2 was in the trailer, given that the same people were doing the same things in both.

 

I agree.

 

Also fine by me to shoot something specifically and obviously for the trailer, like having an actor say right to the camera, "Wanna see what happens next? Ya gotta come see the movie..."

 

Agreed also.

 

My issue is with material used in the trailer that isn't part of the final film at all.

 

R,

[Andy_Alderslade]

I have someone else writing all of my comments for me on this website, does that make them any less valid? I don't credit this person either, in fact he's writing this one right now.

 

R,

 

Ha, I just had visions that you have enslaved some magical little pixie who's currently chained to a desk over a keyboard as we speak...

 

 

It seems like these non-sensical debates take place whenever a piece of art which splits tastes receives recognition, people grasp at illogical straws to try and discredit it, when really we just have to admit we don't have to like certain things or like things that are deemed to be good or 'high-brow.'

[Brian Rose]

Third her double got a credit and its not the same as a DP not getting credit and then someone else getting the Oscar for Best Cinematography, and Portman did not win an Oscar for someone else's acting.

 

The exception being Mauro Faure's win ;)

[Phil Rhodes]

There are now 100W compact fluorescents (yes, that's 100W actual power, not 100W equivalent.) Must be equivalent to, what, 300W incandescent?

 

And it won't set fire to your china ball. Probably.

 

P

[Andy_Alderslade]

There are now 100W compact fluorescents (yes, that's 100W actual power, not 100W equivalent.) Must be equivalent to, what, 300W incandescent?

 

And it won't set fire to your china ball. Probably.

 

P

 

Hey Phil, thats interesting news, don't quite get the connection between that and Black Swan though :D

 

Interesting none the less though.

[Jim Carlile]

This is such a NON-story... OMG, a professional dancer was used for shots in a movie about professional dancing???

 

No, but the problem is that the dancing was an integral part of the performance, and it wasn't hers. And yet she got an Oscar for it.

 

If this news had come out before the vote, there's no way she would have won.

[Jim Carlile]

I read about the use of the double and the digital face replacement work in magazine articles before I saw the movie, and I saw the movie within the first two weeks of its release, so now, months later, I'm dumfounded by this notion that the public wasn't told about the use of the double, that they were deceived somehow. And now the director is just recomfirming what was said at the time of the movie's release, so I'm sure he's dumbfounded as well.

 

The director's being disingenuous about the number of shots and their nature. Portman did the cutting-all-over-the-place inserts, which means nothing. I also laughed out loud at his remark about the complicated ones using CGI. Of course they did- because Portman can't dance!

 

I assure you that the director would have been even more dumbfounded if this news about the double had broken publically (and all over) before the vote.

 

Just to be clear, nobody's upset that they used a double in a movie. Nobody's calling it dishonest. The problem is that if a performance enters into the realm of being Oscar-worthy, then it should be theirperformance and not someone else's.

 

Here's the best analogy of all-- imagine if Olivier's voice had been dubbed by another actor during the most prominent theatrical scenes in his Shakespeare movies, because his own didn't sound right?

 

He wouldn't have gotten an Oscar for the one, that's for sure. And for good reason.

[Mike Lary]

Here's the best analogy of all-- imagine if Olivier's voice had been dubbed by another actor during the most prominent theatrical scenes in his Shakespeare movies, because his own didn't sound right?

 

Actually, that's not an analogy. But it does clearly illustrate the flawed logic in your argument.

[David Mullen ASC]

No, but the problem is that the dancing was an integral part of the performance, and it wasn't hers. And yet she got an Oscar for it.

 

If this news had come out before the vote, there's no way she would have won.

 

I'm an Academy voter and I knew already about the use of the double because it was not a secret... and I voted for her. So much for this theory that Academy voters were deceived or that they gave her the vote because of her dancing skills and not her acting skills.

 

This movie was not wall-to-wall dancing, there are plenty of non-dancing acting moments in this movie. I don't even think this is particularly a dance movie, it's more like "Repulsion", it's about someone going mad.

[Matt Pacini]

Good points David, my apologies.

The first thing I read were the dancer saying she didn't get a credit.

So if she did, then SHE is the one lying!

 

Anyway, I think perhaps some of the reaction to it is maybe so exaggerated because so much of us are tired of the egos.

I just groan when I hear "I did all my own stunts".

Like I care anyway. That is just total BS.

 

I remember an interview with Luc Besson, where he said he doesn't like working for the US studio system because of how petty the unions are.

He said that one time they were moving the camera, and he reached down to move a cable that was hanging up by his feet, and a crew member pointed at him and rudely said "hey, that's not your job!".

 

I can't imagine them letting an actor do dangerous stunts, purely so they can claim THEY did it, while a stuntman stands around watching.

Maybe it happens, I just seriously doubt it, that's all.

 

 

If I were a famous actor, I'd say in interviews:

"you know, I did all my own gaffer and grip work on this film" just to point out how ludicrous this has gotten.

 

 

Matt Pacini

[Chris Keth]

This is such a NON-story... OMG, a professional dancer was used for shots in a movie about professional dancing??? The movie was a work of FICTION, the actors aren't playing themselves, Natalie Portman didn't really die at the end, she pretended to. Actors play nuclear scientists, astronauts, ancient Romans, Jesus Christ, etc. all sorts of people that they aren't in real life. And they do it with the help of technicians, stunt men, efx people, costumers, doubles, etc. It's the art of ILLUSION.

 

Sarah Lane is my cousin. I've had to try very hard lately not to piss off my family by saying exactly what David has. They just don't quite get it.

 

I do wish she had been credited properly and fairly for the job she did, though. Everybody knows the production company or the distributors aren't going to flaunt the fact that there was a dance double for Natalie. That's not the point. The point is that she was a dance double and was credited for stunts and as a hand model.

Edited April 13, 2011 by Chris Keth

[ian dart]

jeez talk about flogging a dead horse.................

 

she won the oscar...get over it.

 

cheers

[Brad Grimmett]

Wow, I'm coming late to this party...

Did Sarah Lane work on Black Swan SOLELY for the credit? Or did she get paid? She got paid. And I'd bet she got paid pretty darn well. I'd also guess that she had some days where she didn't even leave her trailer, but she still got paid. And there were probably some days where she danced her butt off, and still got paid. Waiting and dancing are what she was paid to do. Did the checks not cash when she worked on the film? My point is, we all work for a living. We may love what we do, but we expect to be compensated for it, and she was. Would she have done the job if they offered her 'credit only' as payment? No. She worked so that she could earn a living, which is perfectly acceptable. She didn't work on the film for a credit. All of this business about her credit is just silliness. And as far as I can tell it's silliness created mostly by the press, not by Sarah Lane.

Sarah Lane got paid for the job she did, and so did Natalie Portman. Does Sarah deserve 'extra' credit later on just because Natalie won an Oscar? I don't tend to think so. Would it have been nice if the producers had just written "Natalie Portman Dance Double - Sarah Lane" in the credits? Of course. But what difference does that make? She did the work and everyone who matters already knew it.

[Brian Hulnick]

Thankyou for that measured and insightful critique. Your opinion is highly valued. This forum would not be the valuable resource that it is without the intelligent and informed contributions of people like yourself.

 

 

+1

It's a bit juvenile to call a movie "stupid" just because do don't like it. Give your reasons for not liking it, but throwing insults at the cast & crew is not cool.

[Phil Rhodes]

What on earth was I talking about with the china ball post?

[Daniel Jackson]

I found the film and Portman's performance very entertaining.

Edited June 9, 2011 by Daniel Jackson

[Patrick Cooper]

The producers intentionally wanted the audience to believe that Beals did all the dancing herself. Hell they even used a man for a shot in the final scene!

 

R,

 

Gross!!!

[EddieWelch]

She surely dances better than me and looks a whole lot better too. :)

[Joe Zakko]

 

How would you feel if you were taken out of the credits, and the director on a film you shot started saying in interviews: "oh yeah, I was the DP on this film, and I did the camerawork as well", and then WON AN ACADEMY AWARD FOR CINEMATOGRAPHY FOR THE FILM!!!

 

That's a closer approximation to what happened here, and I think in that case, I'm pretty sure you would think it was a big deal.

 

 

That's not at all a closer approximation. That would be a close approximation if Portman won an oscar for dancing. Whether there was deception or not is immaterial in regards to her deserving the oscar. She didn't win for dancing, she won for a terrific performance.