Awards Season 25-26

I don’t think the guy with Tourette’s should apologise, he’s clearly done nothing wrong. But BAFTA and the broadcasters absolutely should. Shocking.

Maybe it’s a lack of understanding and I’m happy to learn from it - but he shouldn't have been in the audience. They knew his tics were offensive slurs. This was a live audience. The winners not only had their moment ruined, but were belittled and humiliated. Not intentionally, but doesn’t make it any better or their feelings any less important.

I don’t understand the insistence that he “had every right to be there” it’s a disability and it comes with limitations, that’s why it’s called a disability. You wouldn’t put someone with asthma in a room full of dogs. You wouldn’t put a wheelchair bound person on a ski slope. It’s ok that some things are out of bounds. Especially when it impacts others, not just yourself.
 
The problem is, unlike the other examples, is where do you draw the line in terms of those limitations? It's basically entirely subjective.
 
akzmxn.jpg
 
funky said:
I don’t think the guy with Tourette’s should apologise, he’s clearly done nothing wrong. But BAFTA and the broadcasters absolutely should. Shocking.

Maybe it’s a lack of understanding and I’m happy to learn from it - but he shouldn't have been in the audience. They knew his tics were offensive slurs. This was a live audience. The winners not only had their moment ruined, but were belittled and humiliated. Not intentionally, but doesn’t make it any better or their feelings any less important.

I don’t understand the insistence that he “had every right to be there” it’s a disability and it comes with limitations, that’s why it’s called a disability. You wouldn’t put someone with asthma in a room full of dogs. You wouldn’t put a wheelchair bound person on a ski slope. It’s ok that some things are out of bounds. Especially when it impacts others, not just yourself.
Click to expand...
But then it would be a deliberate exclusion from an event based purely on disability. I get that it's a difficult situation to navigate but I have a hard time with the idea that excluding someone because their condition is deemed socially unacceptable is the way forward.

His tics may well not have been slurs depending on the context - part of what makes it such a cruel condition is that he's no way of knowing what will come out of his mouth, and anxiety about things he absolutely shouldn't say will increase the likelihood of him saying them.
 
variety.com

John Davidson Gives First Interview and Explains Tourette’s Tics After Shouting N-Word and Other Slurs at BAFTAs: ‘I Felt a Wave of Shame’ (EXCLUSIVE)

John Davidson's explains Tourette's tics and the BAFTA N-word incident in his first exclusive interview with Variety.
variety.com variety.com

John gives a thorough explanation of his tics in this interview & he is clearly very distressed about what happened at the awards.

It also highlights another failure - why was he sat so near a microphone? This could have helped with at least some of the impact of what was said while also still ensuring he was included at the ceremony. There are a number of different things that could & should have been discussed by both the organisers & the BBC such as this prior to the show that would have avoided much of the ensuing embarrassment & controversy.

This should be a prerequisite really when someone with John's condition is attending something like an awards ceremony, which is likely to trigger him even more. I think some planning & forethought might have helped prevent much of this situation turning into what it has. As @ButterTart points out, I don't feel comfortable with the glib response of "well he's got a disability - sometimes you can't do things others can" - the safeguarding that could have helped wasn't properly managed. Let's look at that before immediately going to an approach of exclusion. It shouldn't be forgotten that he was there due to the (Best Actor winning) film about his life & the struggles his disorder has caused him.
 
Last edited:
funky said:
I don’t understand the insistence that he “had every right to be there” it’s a disability and it comes with limitations, that’s why it’s called a disability. You wouldn’t put someone with asthma in a room full of dogs. You wouldn’t put a wheelchair bound person on a ski slope. It’s ok that some things are out of bounds. Especially when it impacts others, not just yourself.
Click to expand...
No you provide relevant adaptions. There's a lovely quote about people not being disabled, it's the environment they live in that makes them disabled. All the things you listed are possible, with the relevant amendments.

It's absolutely not ok that things are out of bounds.
 
I think this is an unfortunate prime example of why social media monetisation is the enemy of nuanced discussion. The internet is now absolutely flooded with 'hot takes' on this, with only the most performative regard for the actual feelings and wellbeing of the people directly involved.

The BBC should be utterly ashamed of this oversight (if that's what it was) and somebody should lose their job. For me, that's where any condemnation should begin and end.
 
Agneeta said:
No you provide relevant adaptions. There's a lovely quote about people not being disabled, it's the environment they live in that makes them disabled. All the things you listed are possible, with the relevant amendments.

It's absolutely not ok that things are out of bounds.
Click to expand...
1000017852.jpg
Many other backgrounds are available, if you'd prefer sea cliffs, a cityscape or a field of sunflowers.

But yes, absolutely. The default answer cannot be exclusion for people with disabilities.
 
Last edited:
Sardonicus said:
variety.com

John Davidson Gives First Interview and Explains Tourette’s Tics After Shouting N-Word and Other Slurs at BAFTAs: ‘I Felt a Wave of Shame’ (EXCLUSIVE)

John Davidson's explains Tourette's tics and the BAFTA N-word incident in his first exclusive interview with Variety.
variety.com variety.com

John gives a thorough explanation of his tics in this interview & he is clearly very distressed about what happened at the awards.

It also highlights another failure - why was he sat so near a microphone? This could have helped with at least some of the impact of what was said while also still ensuring he was included at the ceremony. There are a number of different things that could & should have been discussed by both the organisers & the BBC such as this prior to the show that would have avoided much of the ensuing embarrassment & controversy.

This should be a prerequisite really when someone with John's condition is attending something like an awards ceremony, which is likely to trigger him even more. I think some planning & forethought might have helped prevent much of this situation turning into what it has. As @ButterTart points out, I don't feel comfortable with the glib response of "well he's got a disability - sometimes you can't do things others can" - the safeguarding that could have helped wasn't properly managed. Let's look at that before immediately going to an approach of exclusion. It shouldn't be forgotten that he was there due to the (Best Actor winning) film about his life & the struggles his disorder has caused him.
Click to expand...
Risk assessments and reasonable adjustments are in place for physical and visible disabilities at any event/venue, so surely something similar can be put in place for conditions like his? The guy’s lived with the condition for decades, seek his input on arrangements to mitigate tics, seek advice from any number of Tourette’s support groups or charities.

Making adjustments to ensure he’s included while mitigating the ‘threat’ of a rogue tic surely can’t be that difficult, especially since he was such a significant guest and it was only right for him to be there.
 
She's jolly American about it, but I think Jayme Lawson nails it here:



All while with her tits out looking fabulous :disco:

The Actors Awards (formerly SAG Awards) went big on Sinners, so I hope the momentum keeps pointing to that for Best Picture, Best Actor, Director and Supporting Actress et al at the Oscars. Which has felt most likely for a while now and I'm here for it.
 
I can’t believe Michael B Jordan won the “Actor Award”. Never even thought he was seriously in the running. I assumed they’d throw Delroy Lindo a bone for career award rather than putting Sean Penn in the running for a third Oscar.
 
Finally seen all of the International Feature nominations. Ranked:

1. The Voice of Hind Rajab *****
2. Sirat ****
3. It Was Just An Accident ****
4. Sentimenal Value ***
5. The Secret Agent *

The two least impressive ones are both also nominated for Best Picture. Go figure!
 
Last edited:
Ellie said:
@VoR I will keep you updated this year with any found downloads.

Disney+:

A Friend of Dorothy
Click to expand...
This one is temporarily available for free on YouTube courtesy of Attitude magazine. I think it’s due to come off YouTube later today however:



(It’s rubbish.)
 
I thought A Friend of Dorothy was very cute actually
 
I watched Sirat the other night. That one took some turns!

Really loved the first half, but then after the kid and the dog died I just felt zero sympathy for the father and his stupid, wasteful decision making that needlessly led to his son's death. Why didn't he leave him with a friend or relative instead of dragging him along on a death march across the Desert?!

Yes I know I'm taking the plot a bit too literally but it really took me out of it, although obviously when it subsequently turned into FINAL DESTINATION I was very much re-hooked

Also this is a very niche observation, but I couldn't get over how much the female lead looks like Caroline af Ugglas.

 
VoR said:
I watched Sirat the other night. That one took some turns!

Really loved the first half, but then after the kid and the dog died I just felt zero sympathy for the father and his stupid, wasteful decision making that needlessly led to his son's death. Why didn't he leave him with a friend or relative instead of dragging him along on a death march across the Desert?!

Yes I know I'm taking the plot a bit too literally but it really took me out of it, although obviously when it subsequently turned into FINAL DESTINATION I was very much re-hooked
Click to expand...
That moment was just totally out of the blue and SO devastating. There I was casually thinking this was the best canine performance since Anatomy of a Fall, and then “WTF JUST HAPPENED?” And it stayed that way for the next hour!
 
  • Like
Reactions: VoR
I can't wait for this awards season to be over. After cat-gate and Timmy's opera fiasco I just want actors to SHUT UP AND ACT
 
Natalie Portman is the Oscar-nominated producer of a French sci-fi animation?
 
Weird speech. If anything there are too many Korean films winning Oscars.
 
I don't care for the K-Pop movie but I like that it brought rightful recognition, and Maggie Kang's dress reminded me of Enya's for the 2002 Oscars :disco:
♡

♡
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top Bottom