Eddie Murphy was slated to host the Oscars. Brett Ratner (film director best known for the Rush Hour series), who also directed Murphy’s flick Tower Heist was slated to produce the Oscars.
Well, a couple days ago during an interview with the oh so raunchy Howard Stern, Ratner made a boo boo in his choice of words and hurled out a gay slur in reference to his apparent work habits, or lack thereof. Subsequently he was fired resigned. You know, the kind of fired where you can say you quit even thought we know you were dumped?
So anyway, shortly after this went down the media world was in a frenzy trying to figure out what ole Eddie would do.
Today he announced his decision. Much to my dismay Eddie Murphy decided to not host the show. There goes the only reason I was considering sitting through the entire
eight three hour telecast.
Now that you’ve been caught up let’s get to the point.
First off let me say that Ratner’s choice of word was poor, to say the least. In a world that bathes in sensitivity in this day and age, he had to know that, like Lucy, he would have some ‘splainin to do.
I don’t disagree with the decision to remove him. I don’t disagree completely. I mean honestly by Feb who would have even remembered this?
But I know the game and how it works so with things being the way they are today, I’m not surprised he stepped down.
Here’s where it gets fuzzy. Below is an excerpt of the article on Murphy resigning. As I read this particular opinion, I found myself almost cursing out my computer screen:
“He needs to stay on and work with the new producer, or it’ll look like he’s supporting the stuff that Brett said,” said one member of the public relations branch on Tuesday afternoon. “He won’t look good if he leaves now.”
Is this what we have come to as a whole?
I can think of dozens of reasons why Eddie should have left the show. I can think of dozens more of why he should stay. But to associate either his act on the show or his standing by the person who asked him to do the show in the first place, with a comment that was made in poor taste is epitome of stupidity.
Whoever this annonymous coward is has the gall to say that Murphy NEEDS to stay and work with a producer who has not even been determined yet! And if he doesn’t agree to work with someone who he doesn’t even know yet, turn his back on the man who asked him to do it, and sellout for what other people think he should do, then CLEARLY that means that he agrees with what Ratner says.
If you’re hanging out with a friend of yours at a club and they get kicked out for acting roudy, if you don’t stay at the club and meet new friends then you agree with what your friend did.
At least according to this genius!
And what if Ratner was Murphy’s brother? Would he suggest the same thing? To turn his back on his family so no one would think he agrees with an insensitive comment?
I don’t know what it is the academy has with Murphy and unassociated events. But this is not the first time.
At the 2006 ceremony, Murphy was basically a sure thing to win the Best Supporting Actor Oscar for Dreamgirls. Word is he was snubbed because the bourgeois people of the Oscar’s thought a stereotypical character he did in his follow up flick Norbit was in poor taste.
Maybe it was. And worse, it wasn’t funny.
But what does that have to do with his performance in Dreamgirls?
That’s kind of mirrored with this situation. It seems to me that those pesky Oscar folks seem to do more judging than just movies. Someone should remind them they are to critic movies, one at a time and not try to play God in real life.
You’re just a glorified Hollywood Glee Club for crying out loud, and honestly you have a very suspect opinion on the word “Best” when it comes to movies anyway.
So leave Eddie alone. He planned on doing the show with someone he trusted on a professional level who is no longer going to do the show. Has nothing to do with what Brett Ratner said.
If I don’t watch the show because I wanted to see Eddie Murphy host, does that mean that I agree with what Ratner said?
Sounds pretty dumb, right?