“It’s demeaning… nothing more than a two-hour meat parade.” Thus declared the American actor, George C. Scott, when explaining his reasons for refusing to turn up and accept the Academy Award for his part in Patton in 1971.
Since the Oscars inception in 1929 only two others have turned down the accolade. In the 30s the writer Dudley Nichols (The Informer 1935) failed to collect his statuette because of an ongoing dispute between the Academy and the Writers’ Guild. But most famously of all was Marlon Brando, who deservedly won the award in 1973 for his monumental performance in Francis Ford Coppola’s legendary The Godfather.
Scott’s personal feelings regarding the hoopla of the ceremony itself informed his decision not to show (if he were alive today what would he make of it now?); and Nichols went without by default, more than anything else—but Brando had a larger axe to grind. When his name was read out by the presenters—Roger Moore and Liv Ullmann—an American Indian civil rights activist, and member of the Apache nation, Sacheen Littlefeather, solemnly took to the stage in Brando’s stead to explain his motives to the global audience.
Decked out in traditional garb, she informed the great and the good that the actor “…very regretfully cannot accept this very generous award” because of his deeply felt feelings regarding the treatment and unfair portrayal of Native Americans by Hollywood down through the years. (Moore reputedly took the Oscar home with him for safe keeping before it was collected by a security guard some time later).
Charlton Heston, James Baldwin, Marlon Brando and Sidney Portier (background) at the Civil Rights March on Washington in 1963. Photo: Wikipedia Commons
To the shameful sounds of booing the Academy spat in its spittoon, cocked its Smith & Wesson, licked the tip of its pencil and scratched a mark against his name. But Brando was not particularly hurt by this; he had gathered enough black marks by that stage for it to really register. The great Nebraskan had himself suffered at the hands of the Academy; the mandarins of Tinsel Town branding him “difficult” some years before—a dose of box office poison that no prescribed antidote can ever relieve (see Mel Gibson). But Brando was such a towering figure—albeit, perceived to have squandered his preternatural talents in the previous decade—that his tarnished star was hardly dimmed further.
Brando had of course won before (On The Waterfront 1954) and perhaps this may have informed his decision—he had nothing to lose. But a man who once said, “How can I act when there are people starving in India?” must be praised for the integrity of his brave decision.
Did Brando’s political stance make a difference to the celluloid plight of the Native American? It is debatable, but the platform was there and he used it.
The Oscars are a ceremony steeped in tradition and glamour, but in recent years the red carpet appears to have usurped the main event. We live in an age where the word ‘star’ has been replaced with the tag ‘celebrity’. The yearning of the hoi polloi to know about lifestyles and scandals of the rich and famous is as old as the movies themselves, and the beast must be fed. But now the choice of clothes designer for the Awards parade outranks the actual work done on the screen. While it is mildly edifying to know that Renée Zellweger is the only sentient being on the planet able to wear canary yellow and pull it off (apart from an actual canary, presumably), it should not be the be-all and end-all. Would Ms Zellweger ever take to the podium and espouse the rights of caged birds the world over? It would be nice if she did. But she won’t, and never will.
Actor Sean Penn, 2008. Photo: Wikipedia Commons
Nominees keep their own council these days. And even if inclined to spout off, their agents and handlers will never allow these rogue elements to go off piste. Sound off about your pet causes at your peril! Just smile, look good, thank your mum and tell them about the dress…
So, is there a star/celeb amongst the current crop big enough (in all senses of the word) to refuse an award on moral or political grounds? Are we likely to see a Brando-esque display in Los Angeles this year? It is highly doubtful. In recent years people like George Clooney, and his well-meaning liberal ilk have given a nod and a wink to extant causes in their speeches: WMDs, Iraq, etc. Sean Penn (Milk 2008) has perhaps come closest.
Certainly he is to be admired for making a point about his support of gay rights in America during his acceptance speech. Thirty years ago he would perhaps have run the risk of never working in this town again! But the walk out merchants, the outright flat refusers, the stolid statue shirkers are very thin on the ground.
To be fair, this is the pinnacle of most of these peoples’ careers, and to shun any chance of future work by controversy courting would not be a decision taken lightly, so they are to be forgiven. Ideological viewpoints have no place at the Oscars now; they are not invited, and are conspicuous by their absence.
But the precedent has been set, and while Scott and Brando’s refusals are now but a faded memory, these figures nevertheless still stand tall in the wings; grim specters at the feast. Like motorsport fans there for the pile-up at the chicane, an Oscar acceptance speech is eagerly waited on for the car crash that might ensue. Who will break down in a deluge of uncontrollable tears? Has drink been taken? How many global toes will curl as the speech careers out of control and goes on and on and on…? Will anyone refuse?
The lonely Oscar, back on the dusty shelves of the Academy—unclaimed? Pixar might make a film about him one day. But he’d better put some clothes on first. Thus leaving us with the burning question of our time: Who will he be wearing?
