Messages of “Soft” Confrontation Between Hollywood and Trump at the Oscars

This year’s Oscars took place in a context that highlights the close interplay between the political, cultural, and social realms. Less than two months after the devastating fires in Los Angeles, the city rose from the ashes once again to host the ceremony, which garnered around 18 million viewers, on March 2, 2025. This event reinforced a narrative of resilience and strength in overcoming adversity.

In addition to Trump’s return to the White House, this election was pivotal due to cultural and social factors. Following this, a series of decisions has begun to reshape the social and cultural reality within the United States, particularly regarding issues of diversity, inclusion, gender, immigration, minority status, and identity politics—as well as a reconfiguration of the international relations framework established since World War II.

In this context, the Oscars had to engage with it all, declaring Hollywood’s stance as the epicenter of cinema—a cultural and political heavyweight built over 97 years. This was evidenced at the awards show, where themes of diversity, immigration, integration, the Gaza conflict, the war in Ukraine, the influence of social media, and AI tools were present. However, Hollywood’s confrontation with Trump’s policies and the new reality in the U.S. took on a more substantive form, albeit more subdued in tone than in previous years.

A Cultural Battle Without Collision:

The Oscars’ decision to adopt a calmer, less confrontational approach was evident from the opening moments of the ceremony, as host Conan O’Brien stated: “For nearly a century, we come here every spring to celebrate an art that has the power to unite us; even in the face of devastating fires and divisive politics, the show must go on.”

Hollywood’s choice should not be viewed in isolation, given the broader context. In previous years, particularly the 2017 Oscars during Trump’s first term, the critiques were sharp and direct, mirroring public sentiment. In contrast, this year marked a shift. Trump won the popular vote for the first time in twenty years, garnering around 77 million votes, while Kamala Harris earned around 75 million. He also won all the key battleground states that determine presidential elections. Moreover, those who were once his staunch critics, including Vice President JD Vance, have become some of his most prominent supporters.

One of the main factors influencing voter choices for both Trump and Harris was their stances on community and cultural values, especially regarding identity politics and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs aimed at empowering marginalized groups. The term “woke,” initially used in the context of the civil rights movement, has transformed into a blanket term for progressive values, often vilified by critics as a departure from traditional and religious norms.

The election underscored a severe divide on these issues, transforming political competition between the two parties from a mere power struggle into a moral battle between good and evil. Each faction perceives itself as a defender of righteousness, viewing the other’s victory as a triumph of malevolence and a threat to their values. This was corroborated by a Carnegie study revealing that Americans are not so much ideologically divided as they are emotionally polarized.

Amid this backdrop, Hollywood sought to promote unity in the face of division while avoiding alienating Trump’s millions of supporters, especially following a series of setbacks that began with the COVID-19 pandemic and continued through labor strikes and culminating in the Los Angeles fires. Consequently, this year’s ceremony featured a speech that championed Hollywood’s values but in a less aggressive manner. For instance, the film “Anorah” won Best Picture alongside several other awards, spotlighting the arrogance of the Russian oligarch class and their exploitation of wealth and power against the vulnerable. The host remarked that “Anorah,” which received multiple awards, would resonate with Americans who see someone finally standing up to Russia—an implicit critique of Trump’s closeness to Putin and the unprecedented shift in U.S. foreign policy.

The actress Daryl Hannah publicly expressed her support for Ukraine by stating, “Glory to Ukraine,” when she took the stage to announce the Best Editing award, which was met with applause. However, this expression was brief and swift, aligning with Hollywood’s supportive stance on its core values, yet without intense confrontation.

Critique of the American Dream:

Notably, since the nominations were announced on January 23, the treatment of political and social issues reflected current changes. For instance, both “Anorah” and “The Wild One” critically addressed immigration and the American dream, challenging the traditional glossy narrative typically associated with it. Moreover, the film “The Intern” directly portrayed Trump’s character. It also examined the turmoil within religious authority represented by the church and its influence or response to current social and political shifts through the film “The Closed Assembly.” The latter elicited outrage from some Christian groups and Trump-supporting conservatives who view Trump’s actions as divinely inspired to save America and uphold religious and societal values.

The most striking example was the controversy sparked by “Emilia Perez,” which garnered the highest number of nominations—13 across various categories—making it the most nominated non-English film in Oscar history. The film follows a Mexican gang member who transitions to female, directed by a French filmmaker and starring Carla Sofia Gascon, the first transgender woman nominated for Best Actress. Notably, this news followed Trump’s release of several directives asserting that the United States officially recognizes only two genders, male and female, the deportation of illegal immigrants, and the removal of Spanish from the White House website, despite it being the second most spoken language in the U.S., used by around 19% of the population.

In this context, the celebration of the film transcended its plot; it became a defense against everything Trump opposes, until old social media posts of lead actress Carla Sofia surfaced, displaying hate speech against Muslims and George Floyd, and criticizing diversity policies within the Oscars. This stark contradiction transformed the film from a symbol of resistance against Trump’s values into an example seemingly mirroring his rhetoric.

Ultimately, the film won two Oscars for Best Song and Best Supporting Actress for Zoe Saldana, who proudly identified as the daughter of an immigrant family, at a time when the U.S. tightened its immigration policies following Trump’s victory.

Independent Cinema Challenging Hollywood:

Independent cinema made a notable appearance in this year’s nominations with films like “The Wild One,” “True Pain,” and “Anorah,” which won the top award for Best Picture alongside awards for directing, editing, screenplay, and Best Actress, underscoring a celebration of independent cinema this year.

Shane Baker, the director of “Anorah,” is considered one of the leading independent filmmakers of the last twenty years. This was the first time one of his films reached the Oscars after winning the Palme d’Or at Cannes. This victory was acknowledged as a tribute to independent cinema, which has stood its ground against major Hollywood studios, affecting the power dynamics within the industry. The film had a budget of only six million dollars, and its lead, who won the Best Actress Oscar, is regarded as a newcomer. This supports an alternative production style that does not adhere to the standards of large studios, aiming to offer more diverse and free films while revitalizing cinemas facing crises due to the rising prominence of streaming platforms.

Baker emphasized this in his acceptance speech, highlighting the unifying power of watching films in theaters as a collective emotional experience that cannot be replicated through home viewing—especially crucial amid the current global divisions. He urged filmmakers, producers, and distributors to prioritize public screenings in theaters before releasing films on streaming platforms to combat the existential threat faced by cinemas.

Unprecedented Palestinian Presence:

Among other independent films, the documentary “No Other Land” won Best Documentary without backing from a major American distributor; this posed a significant challenge to Hollywood’s prevailing model.

With this film’s success, the Palestinian issue was represented in an unprecedented manner. The documentary addresses the arduous hardships faced by residents of Masafer Yatta in the West Bank due to settlers and Israeli forces, leading to their forced migration. Directed by Palestinian filmmaker Basel Adra and Israeli director-journalist Yuval Abraham, along with other directors, including Palestinian Hamdan Bilal and Israeli Rachel Szur, it powerfully showcased the realities on the ground.

Standing on the Dolby Theatre stage in Hollywood with the Oscar in his hand, the Palestinian director expressed that he had become a father two months prior and wished that his daughter would not live a life filled with fear of settler violence. He added, “The film reflects the harsh reality we have endured for decades, and we continue to resist it, appealing to the world to take serious stances against the injustice and ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people.” Afterwards, Israeli director Yuval Abraham stated, “I see Basel as a brother, but we are not equal; while I live freely under civilian rule, Basel is subjected to military laws that destroy his life.” He emphasized that a political solution is essential to ensure equal rights for both peoples, criticizing U.S. foreign policy for obstructing this political path.

Both speeches were warmly received with applause, yet they were met with a backlash on social media from both Israeli and Palestinian sides. Israeli Culture Minister Miki Zohar declared on X that the film’s Oscar win was a sad moment for the film world, while some Palestinians viewed this film and victory as a blatant form of normalization.

What is certain is that providing space for such discourse—regardless of support or opposition—signifies a significant shift that must be understood within a broader context where the monopoly of the official Israeli narrative, which has prevailed for decades, is beginning to loosen.

When the film premiered at the Berlin Festival in February 2024 and won Best Documentary, the directors took the stage and delivered similar speeches. This incited widespread anger, reaching the point where Berlin’s mayor, Kai Wegner, described the win as an expression of anti-Semitism, while Culture Minister Joy Kyalo declared that the Berlin Festival was rife with anti-Israel propaganda. Hence, occurrences within the heart of Hollywood signify that this new narrative is gaining legitimacy in circles that have never allowed such discourse.

In this context, the film “From Zero Distance,” shot entirely in Gaza and composed of 22 short films addressing life amid war, made it onto the shortlist of 15 films for Best International Film as the official representative of Palestine. Although it did not advance to the final nominations, its presence on the shortlist not only challenges the Israeli narrative but also disrupts the dominant patterns within Hollywood. The film lacked a major American distributor capable of mounting a strong campaign, a necessary requirement in the Oscar race, and was instead backed by a small distributor without the means for extensive promotion. Nevertheless, it reached the shortlist, and later, prominent director Michael Moore joined the team to support the film.

Debate on “AI Integrity”:

With the increasing influence of social media and artificial intelligence tools in all aspects of life today, the Oscars were not exempt; we saw how social media’s impact was decisive in the overall success of “Emilia Perez” and particularly for its lead actress. Carla Sofia was initially a strong contender, but the emergence of her past social media posts led to a clear outcome in her not winning, which also affected the film’s overall perception—even after the film team distanced itself from her during the critical promotional campaign.

Moreover, there was significant debate regarding the use of artificial intelligence in the nominated films and its impact, raising questions about integrity, fairness, and transparency in nominations and award selections.

Criticism was directed at the makers of “The Wild One” for utilizing AI techniques to enhance the Hungarian accents of the actors, which some argued influenced the performers’ delivery, prompting discussions about the film and its creators’ deservingness of the nominations received. The director was quick to clarify that AI was employed solely to refine the Hungarian pronunciation without compromising the actors’ performances. Similar scrutiny targeted “Emilia Perez,” where its creators utilized AI to improve the actresses’ singing performances.

All these issues prompted the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (the Oscars) to reconsider its regulations to keep pace with current demands.

It should also be noted that the extent of AI intervention, its limits, and its effects on wages and jobs were among the primary causes of the Hollywood labor strikes in 2023, an unprecedented joint effort by writers and actors since the 1960s.

In reality, artificial intelligence is reshaping the film industry, not only at the technical level but also in redefining the creative process and the boundary between tools that assist filmmakers in realizing their vision and those that may overshadow it.

In conclusion, this year’s Oscars conveyed a message aimed at uniting Americans amid a moment of acute political division and polarization. Indeed, this polarization, fundamentally cultural and social, extends its influence across the globe. It was a decisive factor in Trump’s success and the ensuing ripple effects that resonated worldwide. Additionally, the shaping of the social and cultural agenda in the United States also has ramifications for the international community, particularly in today’s intertwined cultural and social landscape. The Oscars spotlighted the role of independent cinema in challenging and breaking prevailing patterns within the industry, leading to a presentation of more diverse and liberated stories, while also shifting traditional narratives. It further raised questions about the future of the industry amidst the rise of social media and artificial intelligence in today’s world.