It’s well known that Sir Steven Spielberg is quite the philanthropist – particularly when children’s charities are concerned. Though who knew he would be willing to go this far with his giving nature? According to The Hollywood Reporter, Spielberg will be donating his statues to The March of Dimes for them to “do whatever they please with them.”
The Oscar statue is gold plated, but not solid gold, which makes their physical value not all that impressive. But as a collector’s item, the statues have been known to fetch prices in the six figure dollar spectrum. Though there is a stipulation by AMPAS that an Oscar Statuette may not be sold by a winner without offering to first sell it back to the Academy (for $1 US – which itself is a strange piece of trivia), there are no such rules that say a person can’t give them away.
What makes this story even more fascinating (and frankly odd) are the reasons Spielberg has stated for his considerable donation. When asked by Hollywood Reporter columnist, Dennis Nedry, why doesn’t he simply donate money and keep the statues, Spielberg reportedly responded this way,
“While I appreciate and even applaud healthy competition, it simply has no place in the art world. I try to make films that inspire and educate or hopefully at the very least, (*chuckles*) will entertain. In today’s world climate, there are simply too many issues and problems weighing us all down as a society and as a people. Watching the world almost literally implode on CNN each day while these statues catch my eye on a shelf directly above the TV makes me feel incredibly embarrassed. Not only as a person but as a member of the Hollywood community. It seems to me that these statues are a symbol of the Hollywood community’s glad handing of each other and celebrating our wealth and good fortune. I thought why not use this good fortune to do some real good in the world while at the same time sending a message that this kind of back slapping should be of really zero interest to today’s breed of film maker.”
I think it’s weird that this is the way he would send this kind of message. Sure it’s a good thing to do for a great charity always in desperate need for support, but A) The March of Dimes is now going to have to put these on eBay or something to reap any kind of reward – seems like kind of a hassle. And B) as much as I think the Oscars are kind of a joke these days, I don’t think these statues necessarily only represent what Spielberg says they do. After all, these films are a collaborative effort and a best picture win is not just due to the producer (who receives the actual statue). And I don’t see anything wrong in rewarding excellence in any field – particularly if the film in question is something as positive of a message and educational as something like Schindler’s List. So I applaud Spielberg’s actions on some level, I’m not sure I agree with his motives. Thoughts?
I grew up watching Spielberg chase that Oscar, from Raiders to E.T. to the Colour Purple fiasco. Finally seeing him get it meant a lot to me as a young man. Seeing him give them away makes me feel surprisingly weird.
is WFT the way the cool kids write WTF nowadays?
I entirely get what Spielberg is talking about, I feel myself kind of embarrassed spending so much time talking about film in lieu of the seismic changes going on in the world… I do it out of habit more than anything. There is something in the air right now in world politics, it is not a safe distance away, it is not to be politely applauded in documentary features… how you absorb that information, to each their own. I am not able to look directly at it all the time, and so movies are an escape, and I escape there A LOT. But it still feels different now, than say pre-2008.
Regarding Spielberg, if he is so obsessed with world news and the state of the world why is spending x amount of his time making Tin Tin? I know he is involved in a film or documentary on Julian Assange, which is awesome, and maybe what is getting him so restless all of a sudden. The more you look into things the less easy it is to pretend things are fine.
“I try to make films that inspire and educate or hopefully at the very least, (*chuckles*) will entertain” – Mike, he doesn’t need to make “socially relevant” films in order to be a force for good. I think you need to watch/rewatch Sullivan’s Travels. He’s making Tin Tin because he loves Tin Tin, the same reason I’m gonna be there on opening day to watch it.
fair enough, but note he puts entertaining as “at the very least”. Totally think there is a place in the present world for pure entertainment. Tin Tin and War Horse come before this act of protest, so maybe there is a change of heart in him and his films with have more of a socially relevant tinge to them. The Julian Assange story being a kick start to that.
I adore Sullivan’s Travels, I own it, I watch it once a year at least. I need escape as much as the next person. I would say the scales of balance for most of us is probably tilted towards entertainment, if not here, than as a culture – television is cluttered with mindless entertainment, movies are predominately that too, but there is a niche of films that go beyond entertaining, beyond ruminating on form (geek entertainment) to say something profoundly important about the state of the world – and Thank God for that. Otherwise it is Brave New World, and God knows the powers that be would love it to be that.
I don’t believe anything I read on April 1st.
Ok you got me.
That’s okay Rot. Google got me with their “gmail motion” beta release.