Of course, but there’s just too many people that have passed away to include them all in the tribute.

They left Bea Arthur out, too.
I read about this “controversy” today- apparently too many people in the film industry die in any given year to be able to include all of them, and they don’t want to include only the known names at the expense of writers and whatnot.

Hollywood generally is one of the most egotistical, self centered crowds of folks on the planet. They hold an awards ceremony just to pat themselves on the back in the middle of an economic depression, full of glitz and glamor. I think if they gave salute to anyone who passed on this previous year then they feel that they are doing due diligence.

^Lot’s of people give awards ceremonies for themselves….All people thrive on recognition and awards. Why do you think Fluther has awards?

No. Don’t get me wrong. I am a big Farrah Fawcett fan. But her contribution to the film industry was minimal.

@stump Do you think they should have left out Michael Jackson if they couldn’t include everyone? I do.

Farrah Fawcett only did one feature film, and a badly reviewed one, at that. She was TV. Better that she not be in the tributes than to have the audience reminded of a bad film.

Michael Jackson was in The Wiz, which was a well-regarded film overall and he got great reviews when it came out. It’s considered a classic now. At least his time in the tribute was in relation to his contribution to the Hollywood film industry, so a couple of milliseconds of him was fine, IMO.

She was more of a TV person.

@Likeradar Actually, I didn’t watch the Oscars. But I agree with you. Michael Jackson contributed as much to the cinema as Orson Wells did to pop music.

Farrah Fawcett deserves an award for a very brave fight against a nasty form of cancer that most people were embarrassed to talk about. She took her struggle with anal cancer public. (And for that wonderful hairdo – one of my nieces, at 13, was ready to leave home when her mother refused to let her get that hairdo.)

I think of her more of a tv actress.One or two movies does not make her a cinema star.

Michael Jackson wasn’t a film star in the traditional sense but he did do some films such as Thriller which was awesome. It may have not been a feature length movie but it wasn’t a TV series. I think what Michael Jackson did with Thriller, Bad, and Beat It had certain cinematic value.

Plus you have to consider how big a star Michael Jackson was. That kind of stardom tends to bleed over in to other genres. Farrah Faucett didn’t have that kind of impact. Her big impact was on teenage boys alone of saturday night looking at her poster.

@aprilsimnel Incorrect. She had more than one feature film under her belt.

Anyway, if I were given a choice of who to give tribute to, Fawcett or Jackson. If only because FF was in Saturn 3, Logan’s Run, and Cannonball Run. Jackson was in (with due respect to @Captain_Fantasy ) glorified music videos.

Although I haven’t seen Captain EO, so I don’t know if that would count as a film or not. Or if I would count it any more than a film than I would Christopher Lloyd being in that 3D movie that played at Sea World.

Last minute edit: Uh, how can being more of a TV personality than a movie personality be less than someone who didn’t even do movies, anyway?

I thought it was one picture. Ooops.

Message from the Academy.

Farrah was in 3 mediocre movies, and they didn’t have any impact on her career (though I still remember my thrill at her exposed breast in Saturn V).
She was a television actress, and not a Screen Star.

@filmfann Actually, it was more than three but none of them were spectacular. Even still, with that logic it doesn’t explain why MJ got a mention since he wasn’t a film star or a TV star.

@mrentropy Michael Jackson had an Oscar nomination for “Ben”. He had a lot of songs used in movies. This is It and The Wiz were strong film appearences.
Apples and oranges.

I’m just not seeing it. He just has to upstage her, no matter what.