Click to Skip Ad
Closing in...

"Anonymous" Academy Awards Voter Gives Ridiculous Reason For Not Voting For Quvenzhane Wallis

Blogs
by Emmanuel Akitobi
February 23, 2013 8:59 PM
83 Comments
  • |

What type of sick individual could hate on a cute little baby like Beast Of The Southern Wild's Oscar-nominated actress Quvenzhané Wallis?

The Hollywood Reporter recently published one "anonymous" Academy Award voter's "brutally honest" take on this year's Oscar field.  This so-called director (and I have my suspicions of who it might be, but I'll stay quiet until I have proof) felt the need to sound edgy and relevant, I guess.

He said a whole lot about a lot of the nominees, but what stood out the most to me were his comments on Wallis:

"I also don’t vote for anyone whose name I can’t pronounce. Quvez---? Quzen---? Quyzenay? Her parents really put her in a hole by giving her that name -- Alphabet Wallis. The truth is, it’s a very sweet but immature performance from a 9-year-old. I’ve directed children. They probably did a thousand takes and put the best ones together."

If this "anonymous" director hadn't felt it necessary to insult Miss Wallis about her name-- something that she obviously had no control over-- I may have bought his explanation that he'd worked with better child actors, as his reason for not voting for her.

But this is clearly cultural bias, aimed at an innocent child who doesn't deserve it.  So "shame on you", whoever you are.

This so-called director also took a shot at Quentin Tarantino's Django Unchained, saying "it's a fun movie, but it’s basically just Quentin Tarantino masturbating for almost three hours."  I'll leave it up to readers to decide who they think this anonymous Academy Award voter/director could be.

Blogs
  • |

More: Quvenzhané Wallis

Free Indie Movies and Documentaries    

83 Comments

  • Anita | January 1, 2014 10:30 AMReply

    You will love that I Consider myself an American of African lineage, not an African American for obvious reasons, my family hasn't lived on that continent since we came over in the bowels of a ship, so why did my parents saddle me with a a Hispanic first name and the Irish last name of our Masters.

  • Alexandre Correa de Sa | June 13, 2013 5:05 AMReply

    Some posters seem to be semi moronic sobbing SOBs (as they fancy that type of language). Why shouldn't an Afro-American girl have an African-sounding name ? There are a lot of Italian-sounding, Spanish sounding names, etc, in the U.S.. As an child actress Quvenzhané Wallis is fantastic. The film "Beasts" is of course in the magic realism vein and reminds of Marquez' 'One Hundred Years of Solitude'. It is metaphorical and (w)hol(l)y (sic) allegorical in meaning. Some negative critics seem to miss the point as they totally misunderstand what a work of art is, illiterate and dumb as they are. May God have mercy upon their souls. All the best...
    (By the way, I suppose my own name is unutterable !)

  • Kingslay | March 2, 2013 2:24 AMReply

    Congrats to her. I just hope she doesn't divert into making nude movies when she grows older. That's all about it in succeeding in Hollywood! Nudity.

  • FilmShark | February 28, 2013 11:37 AMReply

    I've said this from the get-go. The acting was amateur. I was not impressed with 'Beasts of the Southern Wild.' I also found it annoying how she was acting at the ceremony, fist-pumping and jumping in her seat. Confidence is one thing but it was the worst display of impudence I've seen at an award ceremony.

  • ALM | March 1, 2013 6:19 PM

    She's not two digits old. She is 9, and she was only 5 or 6 when she carried the entire movie.

  • cookie cutting | March 1, 2013 3:20 PM

    dude... she's barely 2 digits old

  • SnapDojack | February 28, 2013 10:07 PM

    She's just a kid! Let kids be kids!

    Imagine being a restless 9 year old sitting with "grown-ups" for four hours.

  • Phil | February 26, 2013 1:16 AMReply

    Off topic - she looked so beautiful At the awards, I was so proud of her. On topic - not sure why anyone would waste time giving this off-the-record comment any airtime. Blah...

  • Donella | February 25, 2013 6:13 PMReply

    If the fuckers can say Schwartzenegger, then they can say Quvenzhané. Some folks in Hollywood seem really terrified of a nine-year-old girl. Rock on, Quvenzhané Wallis!

  • friend | March 1, 2013 12:31 PM

    1000 dollars says this director is bitter because of how Hollywood treated him in the past. That's what the H culture does...chews you up, spits you out...and creates people who perpetuate the cycle.

  • maeric | February 25, 2013 3:34 PMReply

    Please a ghetto name is what ghetto does. This little girl sucks and her nigger parents should be shot for naming this child such a horrible nigger name :)

  • Anita Kearney | January 1, 2014 10:27 AM

    This is just one more instance of white people not accepting black people for who they are. It says basically the same thing the slave master said in the movie "ROOTS", "Your name is Toby boy", take away their name and take away their identity.

  • Me | February 27, 2013 7:51 PM

    Every single one of you is a moron for responding to this comment. Ignore obvious trolls.

  • John Edgerton | February 27, 2013 7:48 PM

    I want to fuck you up.

  • eby | February 26, 2013 8:53 AM

    ur comments just goes to show how poorly ur upbringing is, im so sure yu re not even as intelligent or literate as quvenzhane is yu stupid racist ass

  • Bondgirl | February 25, 2013 6:26 PM

    I bet you couldn't pronounce 13 yr old Saoirse Ronan's name when she was nominated for an Oscar either, but she's Irish like you wish you were, so you'll make allowances. Fuck off.

  • Star | February 25, 2013 5:30 PM

    But wait YOUR name is weird too....ghetto I might add. Remember "Swartzenegger" 4 syllables just like Quvenzhane. It'll never matter what you think anyway!!!!! Oh wait for it.....everybody....he's gonna call me all of the racial and obscene names racists usually hurl. Don't be alarmed...it's history and NORMAL. MAERIC's white hood is the computer.

  • Alex | February 25, 2013 4:30 PM

    Um I know you are trolling but really? You seriously need counseling.

  • Friday Jones | February 25, 2013 4:21 PM

    Zhane is actually an English name that means "gift from God." Her parents creatively combined Quven in front of the name Zhane to reflect the a portion of each of their names and I am sure their love for their daughter. Stop the hate.

  • Friday Jones | February 25, 2013 2:14 AMReply

    What was most astounding in the actual article is that the director that was profiled was only one of 371 "Director Members." And at the very end of the article the director only voted for three categories. What the Hollywood Reporter inadvertently revealed was that the older white male dominating class takes itself way too seriously. This also shows that someone that should have respect for the creative process does not - this is what is wrong with the Academy!!! Here is someone that is entitled to vote and gives out opinion after opinion and in the end they do not exercise their right to cast their vote. And these are the same people young African American filmmakers want to associate themselves with? Learn how to ring your own bell folks and be satisfied with you and your works rather than worrying about what idiots like this think about you and your works!

  • Friday Jones | February 25, 2013 3:33 PM

    No Brainer - you are actually right - he is a director and as such he can make a nomination for for the director category and all Academy members can nominate for best picture. So this "director" it seems voted for those two categories and then declined to vote for anything else which is his right - but why do we have to hear about his "opinions" on the other categories? My point again is I would rather hear from someone that will critic and actually select from the choices. I will give you not voting on films you do not think deserve to be nominated - but if you can only nominate in two categories - that is where I give credence to an opinion. The rest of it is hot air and the Hollywood Reporter could have missed me with much of what he had to offer in commentary. The not voting is still although in this case is the director's right - it is still reflective of what is wrong with the Academy.

  • NO BRAINER | February 25, 2013 12:42 PM

    He did exercise his right. It's preferential voting and including other titles is giving points to films you don't think deserves to even be nominated. This isn't like presidential voting. That 1 point you give to your least favorite film at number 9 can be that 1 point edging the film out for the win. Who wants to do that? I think it's good that Academy members don't have to list all 9 films.

  • p | February 24, 2013 9:21 PMReply

    It's Spielberg.

  • Gene | February 24, 2013 7:59 PMReply

    First of all you will never know who the person is. It could be some retired 8O year old for all you know. That's how the ballots are. I would say over half the voters are in there 60's. They don't usually watch all the films there are just too many of them. They receive hundreds of dvd's through the year and don't watch most to them. They may rely on friends for an opinion. And yes it is a "White Male" dominated crowd. Do you honestly think that is going to change?
    Good luck with that. As for her performance, I heard the film was very good. But with kids they do take after take and edit whats best, just like adult actors. I remember Jurnee Smallett in Eve's Bayou. Wonderful child actor, just floored me, and she is a very good now adult actor. I got to say some of the articles and comment on this site are just amateurist or even churish at best. But I am old and have only been in the biz since 1959....

  • MissTee | February 24, 2013 7:45 PMReply

    I've directed children too. You don't do a thousand takes because you'll wear the actor out. Kids don't hide exhaustion as well as adults. Most of the time you'll end up using the first few takes. Whoever said this, I have to wonder to what extent they have ever directed kids, or if they're ever even around kids at all.

  • ao | February 24, 2013 4:38 PMReply

    Quvanzhane has a name. Her detractor has neither name nor brain!

  • SoopremeBeing | February 24, 2013 3:37 PMReply

    I can say her name just fine. It's really not that hard if you pace yourself with non-Anglo names. But since that's not the American way (to pace and be patient), we have ignorant blog posts such as these.

  • What | February 12, 2014 5:41 AM

    Maybe it is not the WHITE american way to be patient. Don't paint me by your standards dummy.

  • CareyCarey | February 24, 2013 12:10 PMReply

    I could wile away the hours, conferrin' with the flowers, consultin with the rain. And my head I'd be scratchin' while my thoughts were busy hatchin', if I only had a brain. I'd unravel any riddle for any individ'le, in trouble or in pain... IF-I-ONLY-HAD-A-BRAIN.

    But wait, I do have a brain, so excuse me while I stop my knees from jerking. I mean, I realize Shadow and Act is doing what it does best (stirring the pot of controversy) and there's nothing inheriently wrong with that, but I refuse to be led down the yellow brick road to kneejerk reactions. So work with me.

    Rendering an argument against "he said, she said" can be viewed as a fool's errand. Granted, I've participanted in many foolish endeavors, but I am not a fool-time fool. So these days, when I am in my right mind, I am inclined to heed the warning in the saying "Fools rush in where wise men fear to tread".

    Anyway, arguing with, or against, a nameless and faceless man is akin to... ahhh... damn, I can't find the right words. But that last time I found myself barking at the moon, I was either drunk, high or both.

    So today, I'm going to look right, and then left, before I jump in the middle of this road. However, having said ALL of that, I am, nevertheless, inclined to play along. Hey, throw me a bone... I did admitted to being a fool - sometimes.

    Now listen, I think it's safe to assume that the ghost writer is a white person. But I am not going to immediately throw racism on the table. I mean, it may be apropos to call them a prick or a jerk or even a dumb m***** f*****. But racist? I'm going to stick with "dumb-mfer" because the best directors are those who have the time, money, patience and insight to use multiple takes to achieve the best on screen performance (and that's exactly what "Beasts" director did). Should that be used against the actor?

    In reference to the name thang, I can't help but believe he was being somewhat facetious. Then again, it's highly possible that the ghost writer is a garden variety smart-ass-dick-head, who we should excuse because he's a dumb motherf*****.

    But wait, all goodbyes are not gone. GETTHESENETS might be pinning the tail on the right donkey.

    "unless the writer attaches a name to the comments.... it's just the Hollywood Reporter writer talking out of his/her ass. Liberal Hollywood is as racist as any other American institution, but I call BS on this story" ~ Nets & Slam Dunk

  • Vichus | February 24, 2013 11:26 AMReply

    If the director is anonymous, how can you assume that they are culturally ignorant? What cultural background do they have?

    It's not like there aren't people of all races with difficult to pronounce names, but if a black person has a difficult to pronounce name, a white person (we assume) cannot say one word about that name?

    It was a joke. You quoted this person, and right after what was said, they give the real reason.

  • Star | February 25, 2013 5:13 PM

    You ARE ignorant.....CAN'T YOU TAKE A JOKE?

  • Vichus | February 24, 2013 6:24 PM

    Oh, so enlighten me.

  • Iphis | February 24, 2013 6:18 PM

    Oh my god. You're just ignorant.

  • sandra | February 24, 2013 11:02 AMReply

    This is one of the many reasons why I am so amused by black folks who continuously seek approval from The Academy as if it were some governing body made up of all-knowing cinematic gods. I truly don't care about awards. I care about financing, marketing and distribution. If I watch anything Oscar-related it's the pre-show to catch the goofy fashion. That's it.

  • Phil | February 26, 2013 1:25 AM

    I'm bewildered, flabbergasted, and dismayed. I have two ongoing fantasies. 1) someone will win a mainstream award and, while making the acceptance speech, will say 'this is cool but winning the (insert black award) holds way more meaning. 2) The first lady will rock a natural before leaving the oval office.

  • KittyNYC | February 24, 2013 10:51 AMReply

    She was six years old when she did the film. So my question is, did he really see the movie? I think NOT!!

  • Alex | February 24, 2013 10:50 AMReply

    I read the whole post; the guy sounds like a douche of the highest order, no surprises there though. I think to play devils advocate before everyone jumps to the assumption that he hates black people and is a sick man who hates this child - from what he says about all his choices for the Oscars, the man is a straight up douche. Listen to the way the journo describes the director in questions mannerisms, read his ageist reasoning for Sally Field and his silly conclusion as to why Jennifer Lawrence won't be getting his vote. He's clearly not a nice guy. His reasoning for Quvenzhane Wallis is plain idiotic, she's also just a child. I guess Hollywood isn't as diverse as it always tries to proclaim it is. It would be nice to know who he is so he can be called up on it.

  • JDB | February 24, 2013 10:50 AMReply

    I am also guessing Brett Ratner.

  • Sincere1 | February 24, 2013 10:36 AMReply

    Seriously? His only complaint was her name? Everything else he said was pure speculation. Such comments reveal more of HIS own character to anonymously spew such negativity - what a coward!

  • NO BRAINER | February 25, 2013 12:22 PM

    That wasn't his only complaint. He said her performance was immature and he didn't understand the movie.

  • black_butterfly74 | February 25, 2013 12:49 AM

    You called it a coward... Straight judgement based on disdain that went wrong. He probably wanted to be an actor or director & got shot down or his feelings hurt!

  • getthesenets | February 24, 2013 10:28 AMReply

    unless the writer attaches a name to the comments....it's just the Hollywood Reporter writer talking out of his/her ass

    "liberal" hollywood is as racist as any other American institution, but I call BS on this story

  • Tim | February 24, 2013 10:10 AMReply

    You know his stance on Quvenzhane Wallis is ridiculous. But what he said about Django? 100% accurate.

  • Valsadie | February 24, 2013 10:06 AMReply

    My guess is a director who's made a series of films based on a family of toys. More than meets the eye?

  • Aaron | February 24, 2013 10:01 AMReply

    So this muthfucka is basically saying that all black people should have white american sounding names. Fuck him and the oscars.

  • Hassan Fvckry (@DLYDJ) | February 24, 2013 9:43 AMReply

    Whoever it is doesn't have the gull to be respectful. There are plenty of actors who have real names that are unpronounceable and still light up the screen. Ms. Wallis will be one of them!

  • BluTopaz | February 24, 2013 9:51 AM

    ITA. In addition to that double standard--that new White actress, Jennifer something? She can rant about how "stupid" acting is and they praise her for being refreshingly honest, not star-struck, etc. Imagine any actor of color making a comment like this.

  • Kai | February 24, 2013 6:47 AMReply

    I m not sure why ppl are playing the race card. The persons reasons to vote against wallis is retarded and his voting credentials should be revoked immediately

  • star | February 25, 2013 5:21 PM

    Damn!!! This girl should've been white and blonde ...then she'd just be Dakota Fanning a brilliant prodigy not some "her name is ghetto and throwing me off. She's a black girl not an award winning actress" moment of rant. It just makes life easier...first civil rights, immigration, now this!!!!!!

  • BluTopaz | February 24, 2013 7:21 PM

    ...said the one who brought up the mythical race card, which exists somewhere with unicorns and Bigfoot.

  • Vichus | February 24, 2013 6:25 PM

    It's so nice that now you've pegged me as some whipping boy of white people. What a great day, full of positivity.

  • Kai | February 24, 2013 1:17 PM

    @blutopaz, THAT is the point you made in your post

  • BluTopaz | February 24, 2013 11:51 AM

    @ VICHUS--If that's all you got out of my comment, then you keep on letting White people tell you what to think.

  • Vichus | February 24, 2013 11:29 AM

    So what you are saying, Blutopaz, is that any black person who claims that something is racist is at all times and in all instances, absolutely correct, because white people have to be guilty of something, after all; they're white!

  • BluTopaz | February 24, 2013 9:53 AM

    *race card: a mythical device coined by a certain demographic in order to avoid acknowledging their entitled status.

  • wid guess | February 24, 2013 6:13 AMReply

    woody allen?

    i'm figuring you're probably a white new yorker if you stan for "zero dark thirty" so hard. they're the most hyped about bin laden getting assassinated. i wouldn't pay two cents to see that movie.

  • NO BRAINER | February 24, 2013 3:35 AMReply

    Okay. I read the article and I agree with most of his opinions about the films and his votes. "Beasts" was a boring film, despite the popular belief of the film community. Christoph Waltz was basically playing the same role he played in Inglorious Basterds. DDL's performance was good but there was a lot of soliloquies and it lacked range. And the mediocre Wreck-It-Ralph should win over the other mediocre films in the same category. It was just a mediocre year in film and if I were a member, I would limit my preferential Best Picture films as followed: 3. Zero dark Thirty, 2. Silver Linings Playbook, and 1. Argo. Fin.

  • Justin W | February 24, 2013 11:48 AM

    I actually think it was a very strong year for film, especially compared to 2011.

  • NO BRAINER | February 24, 2013 2:41 AMReply

    (and I have my suspicions of who it might be, but I'll stay quiet until I have proof) -- Emmanuel.

    I doubt whether you know who this Oscar voter is. Don't assume...

  • Drummund | February 24, 2013 1:05 PM

    Don't assume someone's suspicions are wrong. How do YOU know?

  • browneyesblue | February 24, 2013 2:02 AMReply

    If her name was Jessica Anne Wallis, she still would not win an award. Whatever. The telecast has my attention until The Walking Dead comes on. I don't care who wins tomorrow. This is the year of the Whitewash. Ignore all award shows.

  • Alex | February 24, 2013 12:36 AMReply

    Brett Ratner, duh

  • Miles Ellison | February 23, 2013 11:35 PMReply

    Why are people supposed to take the Oscars seriously again?

  • CoquettishK | February 23, 2013 10:55 PMReply

    This is just another example of how from the moment we take breathe in this world, children of color have no value in the eyes of white people. Absolutely none. People underestimate this girl and her amazing performance. They say she had an "easy job". Acting is NOT easy, losing yourself in a completely different identity is NOT easy. And I'm sorry but no random child off the street can do what she did. She took a character and ran with it. And she did it beautifully. This director has absolutely no knowledge of her work ethic or the time spent into making the film. This is why I cannot respect the opinions whites have on African American performers.

  • BluTopaz | February 25, 2013 9:00 PM

    Newsflash to vischus: does this look like Facebook to you? I'm not looking for fans, nor looking to convert apologists.

  • Vichus | February 25, 2013 8:53 PM

    Well, Blutopaz, I'm not a negro who lacks the stones to step to a bigot, but I'm not a fan of your approach. I'll make my own option, and choose to ignore your two.

  • star | February 25, 2013 5:23 PM

    I totally agree!!!! I wish everyone would just wake up and realize she's just nine.

  • bl | February 25, 2013 1:01 AM

    Well said, I concer .

  • BluTopaz | February 24, 2013 7:31 PM

    vichus: If I want to reply to a neanderthal, that is MY business--who the frack are you, my mother? I'm always leery of negroes who will step to Black people, yet you probably don't have the stones to address a bigot.

    I'll say it again: if you don't like how I respond to one of the demon trolls who shows up here from time to time, you have 2 choices: ignore it or accept it. You might notice that an anonymous, self righteous girl scout making an attempt to instruct me is NOT one of those options.

  • Vichus | February 24, 2013 6:27 PM

    There's a difference between not turning the other cheek, and stooping down to other people's levels, fighting in the dirt.

  • Iphis | February 24, 2013 6:24 PM

    Oh my god. Can I just say you Blutopaz are amazing? You fuckin are OWNING up in here.

  • BluTopaz | February 24, 2013 11:54 AM

    @ vichus: I am not one of those turn the other cheek negroes. Don't like it? Use your scroll button.

  • Vichus | February 24, 2013 11:32 AM

    Fight racism with more racism. That'll help us progress, Blutopaz!

  • KittyNYC | February 24, 2013 10:57 AM

    To: CoquettishK I 2nd it!! You are right on point.

  • BluTopaz | February 24, 2013 9:30 AM

    "Don't put "white people" into a homogenized group you sack of shit."

    THIS is the reason why you are placed under one umbrella, because you are always trolling Black websites to see what we are talking about. Be the change you want to see, or remain the angry, insecure, bitter, melanin challenged neanderthal that you present yourself here.

    But either way it doesn't matter. You are going to be outnumbered in your own country soon and you can turn all your venom on each other-oh wait, you already have.

    And btw, I don't respect the opinions caucazoids have of African Americans on film either (unless it's Roger Ebert, he's a credit to your race and I wouldn't lump him with the rest of your ilk). So now you can keep throwing bile like an angry, shaved gorilla in a cage.

  • Nick | February 24, 2013 5:48 AM

    Don't put "white people" into a homogenized group you sack of shit. It's people like you that keep this whole white vs. black BS alive. Get over yourself. Move forward.

  • KLJ | February 23, 2013 9:55 PMReply

    First, this director has no direct knowledge of how many takes it took for any of Ms. Wallis' scenes. Second, as a director he should know that there are plenty of adults who NEVER get scenes right no matter how many times the scenes are shot. Third, unlike Behn Zeitlin, I seriously doubt the director has ever interviewed thousand of children for a lead role in a movie so he probably haven't directed any child actor with the talent of Ms. Wallis. The Hollywood Reporter didn't do the Academy any favors in printing this nonsense because it only confirms what we've known for some time - that many winners take home the award due to biased, petty, and/or lazy voters.

  • Joseph | February 23, 2013 9:34 PMReply

    White man bias. The guy is a total prick.

  • LeonRaymond | February 23, 2013 9:31 PMReply

    Hey don't be upset there are Klan Members in the academy also just like they are in politics. That racist excuse just gave him self or self away.

  • brownie | February 25, 2013 5:00 AM

    these bigots do this shit all the time. fuck em all.

  • ALM | February 23, 2013 9:07 PMReply

    Immature??!! He didn't see "Beasts". You can make criticisms of the movie, but calling Miss Wallis's performance immature is just pure jealousy. Also, who cares how many takes they did? Even Oscar winners like Denzel Washington shoot multiple takes of the same scene. I also read a piece earlier today in "Entertainment Weekly" in which an anonymous actress in the industry stated that she wasn't voting for Ms. Wallis due to her age, because as she stated, some people have gone nuts after winning, and she doesn't want that fate to befall Ms. Wallis. I couldn't help but wonder if that was her real reason for not voting for Ms. Wallis, or something to say in public to make herself feel positive for not voting for her. I for one would rather these anonymous people in the industry just say positive things about the other nominees and leave Ms. Wallis alone all together than to hear them criticize her. She's 9 for goodness sake! She shouldn't have to hear these short of things about herself in the press. Also, for the record how many people can correctly pronounce the names of ALL of the best foreign film nominees each year? Yep, I thought so.

  • DJ | February 23, 2013 9:04 PMReply

    Is it the David O. Russell from his "I Heart Huckabees days" rearing its ugly head?

  • sergio | February 24, 2013 12:08 AM

    That's a good guess though Russell, who was once known at "the hated man in Hollywood" has changed his act around the time he made The Fighter Now he's a sweetheart. And besides I read the whole transcript of the director's comments someplace else and he puts down Silver Livings Playbook and Argo. Though I agree with him on both counts that they're both WAY overrated

Follow Shadow and Act

Email Updates

Most "Liked"

  • 'Take Me To The River' Celebrates Memphis' ...
  • Byron Hurt Seeks Hazing Victims, Perpetrators, ...
  • Carra Patterson and Paul Giamatti will ...
  • Trailer for 'Contamination' - Film Tackles ...
  • VH1 Announces the New Cast of 'Love ...
  • Check Out the First Teaser-Trailer for ...
  • Papa Pope, Crazy Eyes and Egyptian Revolutionaries ...
  • Weekend B.O. Aug. 15-17 (The Dog Days ...
  • "Bang, Bang!" HBO Releases New Trailer ...
  • Energetic First Trailer for Kenya-Set ...