Let’s state the obvious: Based on performances alone Mo’Nique deserves to win an Oscar for her startling work in “Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire.”
Or at least come in a close second.
But a growing chorus of whispers indicates she might be blowing her chances at her first Oscar.
Shouldn’t her work dictate whether she wins or loses, not her off-screen behavior?
Director Roman Polanski’s sexual assault on a 13-year-old girl didn’t stop him from getting the Oscar for the 2002 film “The Pianist.” Heck, the audience gave him a standing ovation.
So why should Mo’Nique’s behavior threaten her chances at the gold statuette?
The comedienne didn’t attend an Oscar luncheon recently, supposedly a social faux pas. And the actress’ behavior late last year made headlines.
The LA Times blog Gold Derby recently questioned whether she’s hurting her chances for an Oscar.
Google “Mo’Nique Oscar Diva” and you’ll get roughly 250,000 responses.
Shrewd film critic and blogger Roger Moore asked some tough questions recently regarding Mo’Nique’s chances in light of her recent behavior. He’s still sticking by her based on her performance. And so am I. But I have to wonder … would a male actor get such treatment?
(Photo: Academy Award nominee Mo’Nique, seen here in “Precious,” is getting bad reviews for her off-screen behavior of late. Will it cost her the Oscar, and should voters care?)
Related posts:
on 
on 
on 
on 
{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }
To answer your first question- of course off-screen behavior (short of a heinous, inexcusable crime committed; not that it stopped Polanski from winning an Oscar) shouldn’t be factored in; it SHOULD be about the work. But when voter bias/agenda factors in, that’s to be expected (which is not restricted to the Academy of MP&S, to be fair). As for your last question re. male actors, I’ll cite Eddie Murphy not winning for “Dreamgirls” (though I felt Jackie Earl Haley in “Little Children” gave the best performance in that category that year)…