Anything Goes : Why didn't Will Smith get an Oscar nomination for "Concussion"? by James David Sullivan

In what way can an organization that profits hugely from freakishly large men playing children’s games exert pressure upon people who are in their position in part due to a long proven track record in a completely different industry with the only commonality being both industries are entertainment? Seriously, you think that what the NFL wants is of any concern to a significant number of AMPAS members who take their voting quite seriously? Proof? If Concussion or Will Smith “deserved” an Oscar nomination, which of the nominees did not deserve their nomination?

If I had concrete proof, you wouldn't see me posting it here. It would appear in the Times, Post, etc. But remember that Dr. Bennet Omalu only had suspicions at first. And it turned out he was right. The NFL was apparently willing to do a considerable amount to discredit Omalu and that is well documented. In fact, the movie indicates the NFL even has the power to motivate the FBI to arrest an elected official (the head of the coroner's office) on trumped-up charges. I don't have a lot of time right now, but let me just pose and answer a few questions: 1. Was the NFL concerned about the release of "Concussion"? "[T]his is also a film that feels primed for controversy. NFL owners reportedly spent 'significant time' at a meeting in May discussing how to react and respond to the release of 'Concussion.' [Sports Illustrated's Peter] King states outright that it’s 'a movie the NFL is not going to like.' So keep your eyes peeled for the inevitable smear campaign if it threatens to take on the larger publicity profile of Oscar contender. We see it every year." Verbatim from Variety: http://variety.com/2015/film/in-contention/sonys-concussion-could-bring-... Note that quote not only indicates that Variety thought there was the possibility of a smear campaign if "Concussion" received one or more Oscar nominations. What went on in that NFL meeting? Was it an even more brilliant plan to "nip the problem in the bud" by ensuring "Concussion" never received any Oscar nominations? Food for thought. 2. Does Hollywood ever bow to pressure? Another great movie, "Trumbo", showed exactly what happened to some writers when Washington turned up the heat. The blacklisted writers were thrown to the wolves: "Sixty-five years ago, the town's studio chiefs, executives and guilds joined a communist witch hunt launched by THR's legendary owner, Billy Wilkerson. Today, in the first-ever exploration of a demagogue's mission and the lives destroyed, his son writes a formal apology." Verbatim from the Hollywood Reporter: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/features/blacklist-thr-addresses-role-6... I can provide lots of other examples - I just don't have time right now. 3. Is the NFL a powerful organization? Clearly, the AMA didn't want to stand up for a Omalu, and the AMA is an extremely powerful organization. "The NFL split a massive $7.24 billion in revenue with all 32 teams last season.....More comparisons to help put $7.24 billion in context: More than every Steven Spielberg movie ever at the box office, according to Box Office Mojo; The NFL could buy four space shuttles; 10 Pluto missions with enough left over to pay Peyton Manning to run them. Since 1997, American taxpayers have contributed a total of $4.7 billion for NFL stadiums." If the NFL was rated by Fortune, they would be #50 in the F500 list. They are an extremely powerful organization! Quotes from: http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/7/20/9006401/nfl-teams-revenue-tv-deal-... So, if you don't think the NFL has the clout to "ask Hollywood for a favor" by perhaps using a method financially equivalent to an Al Capone negotiation, I think you are being extremely naive. By the way, it would be good if you would at least read my posts fully before making comments on them. I never said I thought Will Smith should receive an Oscar, and I indicated exactly why I thought he shouldn't. And you are apparently unaware of a few facts: First, the number of nominations for Best Picture was increased to 10 in June of 2009. There were only 8 nominations for Best Picture this last "go around". That left two slots open for two more pictures. No other movie would have to have been removed from the nominations to include this movie in that list. Don't you keep up with these things? Because if you don't, why don't you just keep your comments to yourself? I will say this: if the NFL had you on their payroll, your comment would been the exact thing I would have expected from them. I do hope others look into this. If there is truth to what I think may have happened, maybe someone will come forward.

By the way, the foul-up in the numbering above is not my fault. The Stage 32 system did that. I wish I knew how to turn it off!

No question the NFL is a rich corporation. Most assuredly they will not like “Concussion”. The NFL exerting pressure on Dr. Omalu, an individual who was trying to research something the NFL was involved in, is one thing. Affecting thousands of people in an industry that does not rely on the NFL for funding is somewhat different. An industry that is more than 90% independent productions not controlled by any over-arching entity would have to be taken on one by one on a project and individual basis. I believe the NFL is less important to many in creative industries than in the general public. Discussion of football at work during shoots is, and has been, very limited to non-existent . There must be some but not as a generality. Just as there must be some interest in the NFL among AMPAS members, but interest and the method by which the NFL could impact any decision making process regarding the Oscars is somewhat nebulous. Accuse me of being naive, really? An ad-hominem argument. Really? You have a conspiracy theory but I’m naive?

You are either intentionally or blindly missing key points. First of all, it wasn't simply Dr. Omalu. The American Medical Association never bothered to stand up for Dr. Omalu when it mattered most. The AMA is huge and very powerful, but apparently even they are afraid of the NFL. So, it wasn't just the NFL versus one individual. Second, you really don't understand the movie business. All the independent productions have to go through distribution. For a wide theatrical release, that primarily involves the six major studios: WB, Disney (and subsidiaries), Fox, Sony/Columbia, Universal, and Paramount. There are a few other major players in distribution, such as Lions Gate, Focus Features, Weinstein/Dimension, etc. Take a look at this list if you don't already know this: http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/release-schedule Limited releases seldom have much chance of a large box office gross or major movie awards. So, it is NOT a matter of the NFL talking to huge numbers of people: Contacting the studio heads and the heads of the other major distributors involves talking to 10-20 people at most. Nobody needs to contact all the independent producers; a few key players on the distribution side is all it takes. They are the gatekeepers to the industry. Therefore your suggestion that the movie "industry that is more than 90% independent productions not controlled by any over-arching entity would have to be taken on one by one on a project and individual basis" is not only false, it is ridiculous. The distributors are the over-arching entity which you claim does not exist. And by the way, where did you get the statistic "90%"? It's probably in the ballpark, but don't you ever do any research to verify what you "believe"? Or are you just one great big walking Wikipedia? Every time I make a statement, I don't expect someone to believe it. So I provide support by recognized authorities either at the time I state it or when called to do so. That's something you either can't or won't do, apparently. And that gets to your credibility, which is getting lower and lower in my opinion with each post you continue to make. Let's take a look at the arguments you have used to support your opinions. You misquote me about whether I thought Will Smith should have received an Oscar nomination for Best Actor. (Do you just not read what others write or do you ignore it?) You don't know the current maximum number for Best Picture nominations. (Who doesn't know that?) And now you try to divert the issue by your apparent ignorance of the essential role distributors play in the movie industry. If you know so little about the movie industry, why do you make such unfounded statements? Let me address your mention of "ad hominem" - you don't really understand this term, do you? Literally, it means "attacking the man" (instead of the argument). Attacking the credibility of someone is a perfectly legitimate tactic. If, for instance, you also were known to believe that the world is flat, that would be a perfectly legitimate topic to bring up. It goes to your credibility. And your beliefs are simply not credible. They are not supported by the facts. Nor do you take the time to do your homework. Because if you did, you would realize there is no support for your beliefs. Furthermore, even when you are caught in your mistakes, you don't admit them, you don't acknowledge them, and you don't apologize for them. You just gloss on over them and hope others forget. Maybe you think that's what men do. Maybe you think that's what professionals do. I've got news for you. That's not what real men and real professionals do. Dr. Omalu didn't, and we should all be grateful for that. And, with regard to your accusation of "conspiracy theories" - I appear to be in good company. Recall the Variety quote I gave you in my last post: "So keep your eyes peeled for the inevitable smear campaign if it threatens to take on the larger publicity profile of Oscar contender. We see it every year." Is that a conspiracy theory as well? The NFL may have heeded the old adage: "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure." Get to the distributors and you won't need to do any damage control later. Now, do you wish to continue spouting off your "beliefs" - all of which have been thoroughly refuted? Or would you like to do the mature, professional thing and start apologizing. Your choice.

And by the way, I couldn't help making comments on two more of your previous comments. First: "No question the NFL is a rich corporation." Really? That's like saying that Godzilla is a large lizard. Or that Wal-Mart has had some success in business. Attempting to downplay the power of the NFL is insulting. Do you know how to conduct a civilized discussion or not? Second: "Most assuredly they will not like 'Concussion'." Really? The NFL tried to ruin Dr. Omalu's life. They even apparently pressured the FBI into trumping up charges on his boss to put additional pressure on him to retract his findings. So, if the NFL can control the FBI, you don't think they can do similarly to Hollywood? Oh, please!

You don't see boxing being made illegal either. Evidence that too many shots too the head is bad for you is pretty obvious in any number of retired boxers. Why didn't Will Smith get a nomination? Probably because his performance didn't demand one. I don't think the NFL has the ability to influence the Oscars.

@JD Hartman - Have you read the chain of comments above? Do you think North Korea has the ability to prevent Sony from releasing a movie they don't like?

Yes, I did and I'm unconvinced. Dude, don't get so torqued about your conspiracy theory.

I'm the type of person that doesn't understand the impulse to dramatize every hot button current event. Realize I'm in the minority but isn't that what documentaries are for? I think this is really just an extension of the trend toward branding. Football concussions are a brand in the sense that a focus group has heard of them and can tell a poller that they would attend such a film. A traditional story not tied to a political issue, current event, historical figure is lacking the all important brand and is going extinct.

Stories with contemporary ties tend to catch the public's interest and ticket fees. The "bottom line" is that we are in the show BUSINESS industry, and if a producer can increase the chances of selling more tickets, etc., they are going to do just that. I'm not sure which "traditional stories" you think are going extinct. Most of the movies I see are not linked to a current event. However, why don't you name a few movies that you believe are traditional and are going extinct? I would be more than happy to give you an open mind if you have some examples that support your conjecture.

@JD Hartman Whether you are convinced or not matters little to me. However, I wanted to point out a few things about your posts: "Dude"? Seriously? Are you a teenager? If not, why are you using language associated with adolescents? Why not communicate like an adult? Otherwise, people are likely to think your mental capacity is still in the teenage years. "Dude"? Seriously? Are you a stoner? If not, why are you using language associated with stoners? Why not communicate like an adult? Otherwise, people are not going to take your opinions seriously. "Dude"? Seriously? Are you just trying to be insulting? If you are going to label people's conjectures as "conspiracy theories", people are going to wonder if you are capable of professional communication. Let's consider the points that I mentioned above, all of which are documented either in the movie "Concussion" or elsewhere in magazine articles covering either professional football or the entertainment business. All of which I referenced above with Web links; and although you claim to have read them, I seriously doubt you did. It all goes to your credibility. 1. The NFL relentlessly tried to discredit Dr. Omalu. His wife even had a miscarriage, apparently due to the harassment. That's a strong indication the NFL is willing to go to great lengths to protect itself, even when human lives are at stake. Is that fact a "conspiracy theory" in your opinion? 2. Apparently, the NFL was able to pressure the FBI to trump-up some charges on Dr. Omalu's boss to put additional pressure on him. Is that fact a "conspiracy theory" in your opinion? 3. The NFL is an incredibly wealthy and powerful organization. They make about $8 billion a year, and would place as #50 on the Fortune Five Hundred list if they were eligible for listing there. In contrast, the heir-apparent to the gross box office champion of all time (Star Wars # 7) is at $2 billion currently and not likely to go much higher. (See http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=starwars7.htm) 4. Hollywood makes about one football movie per year. (See: http://www.sportsinmovies.com/football-movies.asp By the way, it's not a complete list, although it claims to be.) Without the NFL's cooperation, making these movies would be very difficult. It's hard for me to see Hollywood doing something (or refusing to do something if asked) that would jeopardize this relationship. That's just not good business. 5. Here's a quote from Variety magazine: "NFL owners reportedly spent 'significant time' at a meeting in May discussing how to react and respond to the release of 'Concussion.' [Sports Illustrated's Peter] King states outright that it’s 'a movie the NFL is not going to like.' So keep your eyes peeled for the inevitable smear campaign if it threatens to take on the larger publicity profile of Oscar contender. We see it every year." Clearly, Variety magazine doesn't think a smear campaign against "Concussion" is (or was) a conspiracy theory. In fact, they thought (and probably still think) it was (is) a very likely possibility. And "We see it every year" sounds like the NFL (or a similar organization) does things like this frequently. Of course, if the NFL were to simply call the studio heads and execs at major productions companies (about 10-20 people who control almost all of the movie distribution), they could simply ask for a "favor" and probably have it granted. Without distribution, it's unlikely that any significant number of people would ever see a movie. No conspiracy theory. Just facts. Something you seem to avoid. 6. None of the above is proof that the NFL torpedoed "Concussion" with AMPAS. But it's certainly plausible. If the NFL were to come clean about all the facts, it might lead to a lot of fans demanding changes. Ditto for professional boxing and other high-impact head injury sports. 7. At one point in time, Dr. Omalu only had theories. But he did research and published what he had. Eventually, he was proven to be right. 8. Doctors have known about the seriousness of sports-induced head injuries for a long, long time. "A few years ago" when I was in my twenties, my general practitioner used to demonstrate it by punching a bowl of jello. Such impacts create large cracks in jello, and brain material has a similar constituency. Of course, if football were to be found to be too violent and stopped, $8 billion per year would be lost. A lot of people would do some very dirty things for that kind of money. But that's just another "conspiracy theory"! 9. You never bothered to answer the question I posed, and when people don't, everyone knows why. North Korea, a two-bit country half the globe away, was able to force Sony to pull "The Interview" from release. That was done primarily in the open. So, you really think an $8 billion organization would sit idly by and take a chance on their meal ticket going down the drain? Oh, please! There are lots of other examples of Hollywood bowing to outside pressure, by the way. 10. Finally, it is worth noting that you have not once done any of your own research into this. Just because YOU think that this is a "conspiracy theory" doesn't make it so. In fact, repeatedly stating your own unsupported opinions only makes it look like you can't find anything to support your theories. Furthermore, there's nothing in your posts that would even lead me to think you have even seen the movie. Now, go ahead and "tag" some more. It doesn't look any better online than it does on private property.