Oscar scandals are now an inevitable part of awards season.
Remember suggestions that the man chronicled in “A Beautiful Mind” made antisemitic slurs to colleagues? Or, more recently, how Adrien Brody’s bravura turn in “The Brutalist” got an A.I. boost?
This scandal is different, and the timing couldn’t be worse for an industry staring into the cultural abyss. The gala’s dwindling ratings may be the least of the Academy’s problems following GascónGate.
The masses may finally tune out Oscar night as a cultural institution.
Even without the scandal that’s now engulfed Emilia Pérez, Katey Rich and The Atlantic film critic @davidlsims can’t help but wonder if the Netflix of it all impacted perception of the film. Full conversation: https://t.co/Vh5XsLm9Nz pic.twitter.com/gQ44qBG0yG
— The Ankler (@TheAnkler) February 8, 2025
The first part of the scandal is less explosive but more damaging in the big picture. The Netflix musical “Emilia Pérez” earned a whopping 13 Oscar nominations last month. That’s more than some of the most beloved films of all time.
Think “The Godfather,” “Raging Bull” and “Citizen Kane.” Heck, only three films have ever earned more than 13 nominations – “All About Eve,” “La La Land” and “Titanic.” (all had 14 nods)
The French musical follows a murderous cartel kingpin (Karla Sofía Gascón) who undergoes sex change surgery to become a nonprofit dynamo eager to start a new life.
The film hasn’t generated the kind of universal acclaim that might explain the crush of nominations. The film’s 72 percent “fresh” Rotten Tomatoes score tells part of the story. That 17 percent “rotten” rating (and falling) from consumers hints at something more profound.
Why would a film with less than glowing reviews snag so many nominations? Oscar watches quickly supplied some answers. The film’s progressive spirit, from the protagonist’s (trans)formation to the feminist complaints aired by co-star Zoe Saldaña, made it catnip for voters.
Both sides of the ideological aisle agreed for a change.
By voting for Emilia Pérez, and nominating [Karla Sofia] Gascón for Best Actress in particular, they felt they were taking a stand against the Trump administration’s efforts to erase transgender identity. Though she was a long shot to win her category, Gascón became the campaign’s ace in the hole. No matter what anyone else said, here was one trans woman who could credibly speak of Emilia Pérez as a beacon of light in the darkness.
With a 73 percent Rotten Tomato critics’ score and a pathetic 17 percent audience score, it’s no secret that merit had nothing to do with its 13 Oscar nominations.
Remember merit? Do Oscar voters?
Once again, politics trumped artistry on the Oscar stage. That might have gone unnoticed some years, but not in 2025. President Donald Trump, with acolytes like Robby Starbuck and Christopher Rufo, has been shredding DEI like so many dicey documents.
That cultural tide is washing over this year’s awards ceremony. Audiences already suspect politics weighs heavily in the minds of Academy voters prior to “Emilia Pérez.” That gaudy nomination count solidified those fears.
And that was before a journalist “resurfaced” Gascón’s old, problematic Tweets. The trans performer, one of five actresses up for an Oscar, has overshared on social media.
“Islam is marvelous, without any machismo. Women are respected, and when they are so respected they are left with a little squared hole on their faces for their eyes to be visible and their mouths, but only if she behaves. Although they dress this way for their own enjoyment. How DEEPLY DISGUSTING OF HUMANITY.”
“I really think that very few people ever cared about George Floyd, a drug addict swindler, but his death has served to once again demonstrate that there are people who still consider black people to be monkeys Without rights and consider policemen to be assassins … they’re all wrong.”
The reaction to those messages was swift and unrelenting. The legacy press, which might otherwise downplay a scandal plaguing a progressive starlet, went into Battle Mode. The story caught fire and has yet to cool down.
“Emilia Pérez” director Jacques Audiard threw Gascón under the bus. So did co-star Saldaña, sensing her Best Supporting Actress chances might implode.
Now, Gascón is going radio silent hoping not to stain “Emilia Perez” any further.
Netflix has stopped communicating directly with Karla Sofía Gascón and will not cover any expenses for her travel during awards season, @Variety reports.
— Pop Crave (@PopCrave) February 4, 2025
The actress will have to pay for everything from her airfare to her accommodations in the future. pic.twitter.com/bm5tSLGsZp
The Karmic angle is impossible to ignore. Hollywood watched by as Cancel Culture ravaged the entertainment industry. The stars stood by as predators (Harvey Weinstein) and problematic Tweeters (Roseanne Barr) alike saw their careers implode.
They cheered the former and let the latter happen without a response.
Today, Cancel Culture appears to be receding, but it’s still strong enough to take down Gascón’s Oscar hopes.
A third issue plaguing “Emilia Pérez” may be the hardest to wish away. Film writer Giancarlo Sopo noted how much the musical gets wrong regarding Mexican culture. These aren’t minor quibbles gleaned from a second or third viewing.
Hardly. Sopo’s essay highlighted the linguistic gaffes plaguing the film, cultural missteps suggesting the filmmakers didn’t do their homework.
They failed to crack the books, to be kind. It’s the ultimate diversity fail.
Even the film’s Oscar-nominated songs are grating. For example, “Mi Camino” includes stiff, unnatural references to “séptimo cielo,” a clunky, literal translation of “Seventh Heaven,” an anglophone expression that doesn’t exist in Spanish. “El Mal” suffers from similar issues, with lines like “Los llevan afuera…” — a direct rendering of “They take them out” when native speakers would say “Los sacan…”
The Academy, which has expanded its voting pool following the “OscarsSoWhite” campaign, failed to snuff out these glaring errors. That’s another black eye for the brand.
So where does that leave the Oscars?
The institution previously hurt its cause by demanding diversity requirements for Best Picture candidates. The gala let liberal stars rage against conservatives on show after show, chasing Red State viewers away.
Likely for good.
The Academy hired far-Left comedian Jimmy Kimmel to host the show for multiple years, cementing the show’s baked-in biases.
Is it a shock to see the event’s ratings shrink over the years?
- 2014: 43.7 million
- 2023: 18.8 million
- 2024: 19.5 million
Even the so-called Oscar bounce happens less frequently now. Nominated films once watched their box office fortunes soar post-announcement.
Now? Most films are already available for streaming and others see modest gains.
The gala has shared other body blows in recent years. The “La La Land” / “Moonlight” Best Picture confusion rushes to mind. So does Will Smith smacking presenter Chris Rock mid-show, only to accept a Best Actor Oscar minutes later.
The March 2 ceremonies should have been a chance to restore that ol’ Oscar magic. Perhaps Jack Nicholson could break his quasi-retirement and give the fans a wave from the front row.
Who wouldn’t love to see that?
This year’s host, Conan O’Brien, is less political than Kimmel or other recent emcees. The LA wildfires ravaged the industry in recent weeks. Much of the night will be dedicated to honoring local fire fighters and vowing to rebuild the City of Angels.
That sentiment could lure a few reluctant viewers back to the ceremony. Goodwill matters.
Instead, we’ll be reminded that the most nominated film of the night essentially cut the line for ideological reasons.
Worse-case scenario? The assembled stars turn Oscar Night into ResistanceTM Theater, chasing away anyone who so much as considered voting for Trump.
