By the time the Academy Awards rolls out the red carpet each year, most stars in the running have spent months travelling the world, attending premieres and screenings, and schmoozing with industry VIPs to promote their films and themselves.
Oscarscampaigning is a multimillion-dollar industry. While the Academy has strict rules to help ensure standout films and performances win fair and square, this year’s unexpected nomination of Andrea Riseborough in the best actress category has sparked debate about how the process works.
In the wake of the controversy, Academy president Janet Yang told Sky News campaigning rules will be revisited again following this year’s ceremony, with the “changing environment” of social media in particular to be looked at. “We are going to buckle down and look very closely at the regulations that have been with us for a while,” she said. “There are a lot of things that weren’t addressed in the current campaign regulations that we feel need to be addressed now.”
How does campaigning work?
Image: Pic: AMPAS
Campaigning can include everything from advertising to red carpets to placing actors for the right interviews, all to build the narrative that a film and its stars are Oscar-worthy. Why do film studios do it? Well, there were 301 films eligible for this year’s Oscars – they need to get their films noticed.
The Academy has strict rules around “the annual rite” of campaigning, which include limitations on the number of mailings that studios can send, and also on promotional items, lobbying and parties.
Nominees are, unsurprisingly, banned from making negative or derogatory statements about their rivals in public. Penalties for those who breach the rules can include disqualification and any existing member of the Academy (typically a previous winner) could face suspension or expulsion.
Life on the campaign trail
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:37
Everything Everywhere star on Oscars nod
At a reception for Oscar nominees held in London in February, a few days after an Oscars luncheon in LA, The Banshees Of Inisherin stars Colin Farrell, Brendan Gleeson and Kerry Condon rubbed shoulders with fellow acting nominees including Angela Bassett, Michelle Yeoh and Ke Huy Quan, as well as industry bigwigs.
Advertisement
“It’s crazy!” Condon said when asked about the work that goes on in the run-up. “It’s like a whole other skill that you have to be good at, chatting to people and getting your picture taken and all sorts of things you wouldn’t think of as an actor. And you have to get good at them fast.”
For some, this is all good fun. Take Everything Everywhere All At Once star Quan, who has made no secret of his excitement. “The audience embracing the movie the way they did is beyond anything we ever imagined,” he said. “I’m enjoying awards season very much… it’s been a wild ride.”
Image: L-R: Filmmakers Emile Sherman, Iain Canning, David Seidler, Tom Hooper and Gareth Ellis-Unwin pose with their Oscars for The King’s Speech in 2011. Pic: AP/Chris Carlson
But it can be hard work. Producer Gareth Ellis-Unwin picked up his best picture Oscar for The King’s Speech in 2011 and is now an Academy Awards (and BAFTAs) voter. “It surprised me,” he says of the campaign for the film, which lasted for more than three months. “It was like running for local office.”
In 2016, former winner Susan Sarandon spoke out against the process, likening it to the race to become US president in terms of the cost and length. Speaking on a panel at that year’s Cannes Film Festival, she called for a reform to campaign finance. “People have to be available for months and someone has to pay for that,” she said.
Twelve years on from his win, Ellis-Unwin, who is now head of film and animation at the charity Screen Skills, says things are changing.
“Now you can bring a focus to a film project or TV show and not have the same marketing spend you had 10 years ago. Our distributors joked that it cost something like $30m to market our film for the award ceremony, which is twice the budget for the film.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:13
Colin Farrell: Oscars ‘icing on the cake’
Why was Riseborough’s nomination a surprise?
The British actress’s nod for her performance in To Leslie – a small indie film in which she plays an alcoholic single mother who wins the lottery – was unexpected because there had been no substantial buzz surrounding her beforehand.
And because black actresses who did have that buzz – Viola Davis, for The Woman King, and Danielle Deadwyler, for Till missed out. While Davis, Deadwyler and others seemingly played the more traditional campaign game, Riseborough’s nomination came in the wake of praise on social media from A-listers including Gwyneth Paltrow, Jennifer Aniston and Edward Norton.
There is no suggestion Riseborough herself did anything wrong. But the controversy has raised questions over what campaigning looks like in the future, and reignited debates around opportunity and racism in the film industry.
Shortly after this year’s shortlists were announced, the Academy launched a review to ensure no campaign rules were broken. After a short investigation, the organisation said it discovered “social media and outreach campaigning tactics that caused concern” surrounding To Leslie, but not to the level that Riseborough should lose her nod.
Yang told Sky News it was an “unusual situation” but that no rules were broken “based on the existing rules”.
Can voters really be swayed?
Image: Gwyneth Paltrow was named best actress and Shakespeare In Love won best film, among other awards, at the Oscars in 1999
When it comes to aggressive campaigning, industry insiders say it began with disgraced producer Harvey Weinstein; he reportedly started a whisper campaign against Steven Spielberg‘s Saving Private Ryan in 1999, when it was in the running for best picture alongside his own film Shakespeare In Love – which went on to win. The Academy has since tightened its campaigning rules.
Addressing the Riseborough controversy, Jenelle Riley, features editor for US entertainment publication Variety, says there is a “whole industry devoted to campaigning” but Academy voters will ultimately choose the films and stars they believe are worthy.
“The Academy is going to do what they want to do and they’re going to vote for what they want,” she says. “Nobody can force you to check off her name on a ballot. If people voted for her, it’s because they want to.
“Anyone who has seen To Leslie is not going to argue that she didn’t deserve to be nominated… the truth is, there’s just an embarrassment of riches. Part of me thinks they should increase the number of nominees.”
Can Riseborough win?
There could be a last-minute upset, but it seems unlikely. Not necessarily because of the campaigning investigation, but because the best actress category looked set to be a two-horse race between Cate Blanchett (Tar) and Yeoh (Everything Everywhere All At Once) even before the nominations were announced.
Image: Cate Blanchett, who has supported Riseborough, is one of the favourites to win the best actress prize. Pic: AP/Chris Pizzello
“The nomination is the win” for Riseborough, says Matthew Belloni, former editor of The Hollywood Reporter and a founding partner of digital media company Puck.
However, he says he doesn’t believe the investigation harmed her chances. “If anything, I think she picked up some votes because people didn’t like that this campaign was castigated. Members I’ve talked to thought it was ridiculous that they were potentially being punished for this,” he said.
Belloni describes the To Leslie campaign as innovative, having bypassed the traditional avenues of advertising, throwing parties and putting “the talent on a circuit of interviews and handshaking”.
Without a big budget behind them they instead built up support on social media.
Despite the Academy deciding not to take away Riseborough’s nomination, Belloni says he believes the scandal will lead to further rule changes limiting social media activity.
“I think it’s going to change things. I think we’re going to see new rules and it’s going to update the Academy code of conduct for the social media age,” she said.
You can watch the Academy Awards on Sunday 12 March from 11pm in the UK exclusively on Sky News and Sky Showcase.And for everything you need to know ahead of the ceremony, don’t miss our special Backstage podcast, available now, plus a winners special episode from Monday morning.
The White Lotus star Aimee Lou Wood has called a sketch making fun of her teeth “mean and unfunny”.
The 31-year-old British actress posted an Instagram story about the joke on US TV show Saturday Night Live (SNL), in which comedian Sarah Sherman used exaggerated prosthetic teeth to do an impression of her.
Image: Pic: HBO
In the skit, titled The White Potus, Donald Trump and his family were reimagined as The White Lotus’s Ratliff family, dealing with the backlash to the US president’s recently introduced tariffs.
The third season of Mike White’s hit hotel drama has just concluded on Sky Atlantic.
While the other characters in the skit were shown in the guise of real-life political figures, Wood, who plays Chelsea in the show, was show in character talking about a monkey.
Wood, who shot to fame on Netflix’s Sex Education, said she was the only character in the piece that was “punched down on”.
She also said a part of the parody that joked about fluoride, following recent debates in the US as to if it should be removed from the tap water, was missing the point as she has “big gap teeth not bad teeth”.
Wood wrote: “Yes, take the piss for sure – that’s what the show is about – but there must be a cleverer, more nuanced, less cheap way?”
The Stockport-born star also flagged Sherman’s poor attempt at a Mancunian accent.
But Wood went on to say that she wasn’t “hating” on Sherman personally, just “on the concept”.
Image: Pic: HBO
Wood also flagged an online comment that said: “It was a sharp and funny skit until it suddenly took a screeching turn into 1970s misogyny,” adding, “This sums up my view”.
After sharing her opinions, Wood said she had received “thousands of messages in agreement” and so was “glad I said something”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:48
The White Lotus is set in ‘actual paradise’
Wood shared comments of support she had received.
One, from an unnamed fan, said she too had “a big gap” in her teeth, as well as “an overbite” and that while she had been previously considering “spending thousands on fixing it,” seeing Wood look “gorgeous” on The White Lotus had made her reconsider.
Wood said SNL has since apologised to her.
Wood previously said, during an appearance on The Jonathan Ross Show, that the positive reception to her performance was “a real full-circle moment after being bullied for my teeth forever”.
NBC, which airs SNL, has been contacted for comment.
Jean Marsh, star of Upstairs, Downstairs, has died aged 90, a friend has confirmed.
Marsh’s friend, director Sir Michael Lindsay-Hogg, said in a statement to the PA news agency that the actress “died peacefully in bed looked after by one of her very loving carers”.
“You could say we were very close for 60 years,” he added. “She was as wise and funny as anyone I ever met, as well as being very pretty and kind, and talented as both an actress and writer.
“An instinctively empathetic person who was loved by everyone who met her. We spoke on the phone almost every day for the past 40 years.”
Image: Robert Blake and Jean Marsh with their Emmy Awards in 1975. Pic: AP
Marsh was best known for her role as Rose in Upstairs, Downstairs, for which she won an Emmy for outstanding lead actress in a limited series in 1976.
She co-created the series – about life in Edwardian England – with Dame Eileen Atkins.
Image: Jean Marsh in 1975. Pic: PA
Born on 1 July 1934 in Stoke Newington, north London, Jean Lyndsey Torren Marsh’s mother worked in a bar and as a theatre dresser, while her father was a handyman and printer’s assistant.
More from Ents & Arts
Marsh took dance and mime classes as therapy for an illness at a young age, and began acting on stage with a stint at Huddersfield Rep in the 1950s.
She then transferred to London, and at just 12 years old made her West End debut in The Land Of The Christmas Stockings at The Duke of York’s Theatre.
Image: Gordon Jackson, as butler Hudson and Jean Marsh, as parlour maid Rose Buck. Pic: PA
A success in the US, Marsh appeared in iconic shows such as The Twilight Zone, Danger Man, Hawaii Five-O and Murder, She Wrote.
She also made appearances in classic British shows, including Doctor Who – where she played William Hartnell’s short-lived companion Sara Kingdom – and Detective.
This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly.
The Menendez brothers’ bid for freedom through resentencing can continue with the hearing scheduled for Thursday, a judge has ruled.
Lyle, 57, and Erik, 54, received life sentences without the possibility of parole after being convicted of murdering their parents, Jose and Kitty Menendez, at their Beverly Hills home in 1989.
Lyle was 21 at the time, Erik was 18.
Last year, Los Angeles district attorney George Gascon asked a judge to change the brothers’ sentence from life without the possibility of parole to 50 years to life. That would make them immediately eligible for parole because they committed the crime when they were younger than 26.
But Mr Gascon’s successor Nathan Hochman submitted a motion last month to withdraw the resentencing request,saying the brothers must fully acknowledge lies they told about the murder of their parents before he would support their release from prison.
Separately, Governor Gavin Newsom, who has the power to commute their sentences, has asked the parole board to consider whether the brothers would represent a public safety risk if released.
Image: Anamaria Baralt, cousin of Erik and Lyle Menendez, hugs attorney Mark Geragos. Pic: AP
In light of Mr Hochman’s opposition, Los Angeles County Superior Court judge Michael Jesic ruled on Friday that the court can move forward with the hearing.
“Everything you argued today is absolutely fair game for the resentencing hearing next Thursday,” he said.
From prison, the brothers watched through a video link and could be seen in court seated next to each other in blue.
Speaking after the hearing, the brothers’ lawyer said: “Today is a good day. Justice won over politics.”
Prosecutors accused the brothers of killing their parents for a multimillion-dollar inheritance, although their defence team argued they acted out of self-defence after years of sexual abuse by their father.
Image: The brothers were convicted in 1996 of first-degree murder. Pic: AP
The brothers have maintained their parents abused them since they were first charged with the murders.
A Netflix drama series and subsequent documentary about the brothers thrust them back into the spotlight last year, and led to renewed calls for their release – including from some members of their family.