Inexplicably overlooked in the discussion of which deserving actors failed to receive Oscar nominations and what sort of fun party they might have is this crucial determinant: Did those actors have giant penises? In the cases of Albert Brooks and Tilda Swinton, you have only the rainbow-colored reaches of your imagination, but as for Shame’s Michael Fassbender, well, his penis is both in your face and on the lips of George Clooney. And as this Los Angeles Times article hypothesizes, as with so many of us, it simply became impossible for Academy members to concentrate on the nuances of Fassbender’s performance what with all that dick hanging around there chewing up the scenery, like a shorter, veinier Al Pacino.
Fassbender’s turn as a tormented sex addict “had tongues wagging since last fall, but as awards campaigning chugged along, some of the wagging moved from what was in his performance to what was in his underwear,” says the article in an actual sentence, one that did not cause its writer to take pause and consider the mental image evoked by placing “tongues wagging” so close to “in his underwear.” And a “high-ranking Academy voter” agrees, “Perhaps it inspired people to fantasize, and not actually vote.” Indeed—or perhaps their votes weren’t tabulated because they were returned covered in involuntary wiener doodles. (Now more than ever the Oscars needs that electronic voting system.) Anyway, we look forward to a future of snubbed actors using the old “obviously, my penis is just too big” retort from now on.
Send your Newswire tips to firstname.lastname@example.org